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.

 

Top Astronomer from Pasto Colombia Captures UFO Calls out for NASA!

page: 4
50
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2007 @ 11:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by AlexDJ
-The telescope its a meade LX200..dont know if the Classic version or the GPS version (at least the one they show in the observatory) it's a Smidtch-Cassegraine type of scope, F/10 (focal)


Definitely a 16" LX200R. That's a serious piece of kit right there and it's very unlikely they spent upwards of $20,000.00 on the scope+mount then stuck a crappy Meade DSI on it. It looks like a newer model so it's probably a Ritchey-Chrétien type.
With regards to the CCD, no doubt in my mind it's NOT a Meade DSI. More likely a Starlight Xpress, I could swear I see the autoguider in the video.
As for the "UFO," long exposure...it's either a sat taken from very slightly different angles over several days or it's something much closer to the CCD.




posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by PW229
As for the "UFO," long exposure...it's either a sat taken from very slightly different angles over several days or it's something much closer to the CCD.


What makes you think that this is a sat?, I've seen many satellites hover over our skies, but this definatly does not look like a sat.

This really looks like an extremely powerfull energy source or a very bright light on a airplane or heli.

Sinds heli's and aircraft can't come in space there lies only one answer.

We'll just have to wait and see what this is, cause i have the feeling it won't take long for them to make contact with us.

First Contact is coming......

PureET



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by PureET
 


Yeah but what is high altitude? Pasto is at 2500 metres, how high is the observatory? The Karman line is at 100 km and considered the boundary of outer space and Earths atmosphere so 2500 metres ain't that high. Plus I am not aware of any Earth observatory requiring the Astronomers to use oxygen masks. Maybe they should, perhaps that's whats happening, illusions caused by lack of oxygen


I am a bit rusty with astronomy but with Pasto nearer the equator than the UK I assume that the constellation is nearer the zenith than from the UK? So I assume that it would make it more overhead than I imagined (which is logical because astronomers would prefer less atmospheric interference) so less chance of a copter or a false overlapping affect.

I would hardly call the object "distinct". They shot 400 frames of it and all you can say is that there was a light moving around the sky.

I just like to have as much information as possible before I call it the real deal. As I said I don't speak the language of the report and it could be that they were moaning about a light source interfering with studies. They could have been saying that the tooth fairy was responsible...I don't know!!

I just like to be sure of stuff. Years ago when I was a teenager and interested in Astronomy I can remember looking at Sirius and thought I could see with the naked eye, if I remember, a pulsing green light / star circling it, at a rate of I guess was in seconds rather than minutes. I knew that Sirius was a telescopic binary and both stars were white, so I thought I was mistaken. So I checked again and was convinced that I was right. Being inquisitive and wanting to get my facts right, I went and got my reference book, I thought I was going mad!!! When I got back the star was still there and it was where I thought Sirius was...but the green light / star had gone.

Nothing appeared on the news, so I was thinking crazy, what did I see? Surely someone out there in the scientific community was looking at Sirius? I cannot have been the only person on the planet who saw that, maybe I imagined it?

Anyhow, back at school a few days later we were talking about stuff and one lad who I knew was into Astronomy was there and we got to talking. I brought Sirius into the conversation just to test the water, I knew the lad had a good knowledge of astronomy and would laugh me out the common room if I said Sirius had a companion that was green and orbiting in 10 seconds or so!! He then said that the other night he was looking at Sirius and saw what he thought was a green star circling it. I had not mentioned my observations to anyone..none of my circle were interested in astronomy, so I was chuffed that it was confirmed by someone else. The other lad told the science master, who obviously said he was mistaken!!

Now I still have no idea what I saw...now I can't even be sure it was Sirius..it was a long time ago. But that is one reason why I want as much info as possible. I don't want to know it is a UFO, I want to know what it is!



posted on Aug, 24 2007 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by tyranny22
 


Point taken. But with a bit of kit like that I think all areas should be investigated. Sceptics like me will always look for another explanation. When all explanations have been exhausted, then were talking real deal.

I am not convinced as to a scientists expertise with the operation and function of said telescope. Sure they are bright, intelligent people but that don't make you an engineer. They are not a species that likes to get their hands dirty. To me its common sense to check equipment that gives out normal readings.

It is curious though that whatever it was they got 400 frames of it and it was about for an hour


Damn intelligent ice crystals



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   
What bothers me the most about these "unstable" lights in the sky is that they seem to be always on the brink of being out of control. They always flitter about like a mindless bug and not controled like I would assume an intelligent being or craft from far away would be able to handle itself. I would think anything flying in a 3 dimentional space would be able to hold a true course on a true path to a real destination, and do it without bounceing all over the place, and help them if there were more than one of them, they look like the keystone cops of aliens.....IMHO



posted on Aug, 25 2007 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by donk_316
Rediculous.
"Its a UFO!"... come on folks.
And i quote from a youtube response

www.youtube.com...

"Undoubtedly a UFO"? No, it's just another garden- variety video of a fuzzy, indistinguishable point of light that in lack of credible information, tin-foil hatters immediately characterize as a UFO. Just goes to show how gullible ignorant Believers are regardless of what country they're from"




[edit on 23-8-2007 by donk_316]

[edit: added external source tags for quoted content]
Mod Note: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 23-8-2007 by 12m8keall2c]


I think that Americans, and I am one myself, have been socialized to reject UFO's. If you examine all of the *thousands* of photographs and videos of unidentified flying objects, you really have very little choice but to consider the likelihood that they are not all fakes. Very few people have the capability and much less the motivation and energy to fake videos and pictures. But there are thousands of photographs and videos out there. It is totally irrational and ludicrous to believe that they are *all* faked.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigturkey

I think that Americans, and I am one myself, have been socialized to reject UFO's.


Actually, most Americans believe in "UFOs" and that ETs have visited Earth...

www.scifi.com...


To Many Americans, UFOs Are Real and Have Visited Earth in Some Form

More than half (56 percent) of the American public think that UFOs are something real and not just in people's imagination. Nearly as many (48 percent) believe that UFOs have visited earth in some form.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 06:58 PM
link   
In my humble opinion, just because we see lights in the night sky it doesn't automatically mean it's an alien craft. (Whenever we say "UFO" we automatically think aliens.)

I think governments, scientists could be doing all kinds of weird stuff we don't know about. The object in the video could be something like that, maybe a laser experiment. (I bet there are many more lasers being shot into space then alien ufo's)

If it was an alien spacecraft, why do they want to be jumping/bouncing around like that? And why do they always have their headlights on? We earthlings have better stealth technology.

I believe most of the lighted ufo's are probably lasers or secret nasa craft.
(I know there are real alien ufo's, but I'm starting to think that most of what's seen is really us).



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Electro38
In my humble opinion, just because we see lights in the night sky it doesn't automatically mean it's an alien craft. (Whenever we say "UFO" we automatically think aliens.)

I think governments, scientists could be doing all kinds of weird stuff we don't know about. The object in the video could be something like that, maybe a laser experiment. (I bet there are many more lasers being shot into space then alien ufo's)

If it was an alien spacecraft, why do they want to be jumping/bouncing around like that? And why do they always have their headlights on? We earthlings have better stealth technology.

I believe most of the lighted ufo's are probably lasers or secret nasa craft.
(I know there are real alien ufo's, but I'm starting to think that most of what's seen is really us).


I agree with you, but being a scientist you need to be open minded in order to analyse things like this, and NOT to discard quickly any posibility. But, the response I received from the original source when I invited him to discuss here with us was full charged with prejudice and personal feelings, and that's not good at all, and even worst, it's not even responsible coming from somebody being part of the scientific community.



posted on Aug, 27 2007 @ 11:09 PM
link   
Nice video, wonder why more astronomers don't come forward with evidence like this, because their douchbags that's why. Seems too many are afraid of ufos, thinks it'll destroy their career, if everyone took on the subject like Mexico or Japan does it would not be a taboo or career killing topic, then the other site is those that are too open to ufos and take into consideration every hoax imaginable.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Hi everyone,


I am gonna send him an email in Spanish really soon. I've asked my astronomer's friends
to help me out with the questions they want him to answer.
This is a pretty amazing story and I'll translate and share the information I get with you.

I just hope he will send me copies of some pictures and maybe the video to have it sent
and analysed by some colleagues in Norway. (the ones who study the HP as Hessdalen Phenomena) Just to compare and see if there are similarities.

Peace.

In Thrust We Trust



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 05:22 AM
link   
What size would this object of been? Surely it would have been massive? If the star above it is Antares that makes the object 13.3% the size of it roughly. That makes the object 56,221 miles wide.. Maybe I got the sum wrong but that's how I worked it out lol. The earth is 3,959 miles 14.2x the size of earth??



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 07:14 AM
link   
It's not a UFO, even though it's unidentified, because we don't know if it's an object or a trick of the light (considering the massive amount of light entering the telescope). Jumping to the conclusion that it's an object is itself a sign of irrationality. It might be, don't get me wrong, but there's not enough evidence to corroborate that yet.



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 08:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by dave420
It's not a UFO, even though it's unidentified, because we don't know if it's an object or a trick of the light (considering the massive amount of light entering the telescope). Jumping to the conclusion that it's an object is itself a sign of irrationality. It might be, don't get me wrong, but there's not enough evidence to corroborate that yet.


Hello,

Jumping to the other conclusion like you did is just as irrational.Think about it.

In my country (France), we name this "PAN" just like the US Air Force uses the term "UAP", "P" in both cases stands for "phenomena", so to straighten this out kind of, it is an unknown phenomena.

To be continued...

Peace.

Control tower to a 747: "United 329 heavy, your traffic is a Fokker, one o'clock, three miles, Eastbound."
United 239: "Approach, I've always wanted to say this... I've got the little Fokker in sight."



posted on Dec, 18 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
To me it looks like light reflection from something, doesn't look like an object because it disappears, if it is an object it's MASSIVE considering the size of that star. The object disappears on part of the film when it jumps, which makes it more suggestible that it's light reflection, theres light reflection already from the star quite clearly.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by The Coward
 


Nasa will probably discredit this as swamp gas. Or a military flare, or claim it was an elaborate hoax by the HEAD of the observatory. Despite the fact that I'm very familiar with this mans work, and we're talking about an astronomer who, prior to this, was a skeptic. And for good reason. The guy watches the heavens for a living. So if NASA attempts to discredit this as a hoax or give some sort of swamp gas story then you'll know who to believe.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Zemouk
 



Who's to say a significantly advanced race couldn't build something that massive....Just look at sci fi..I hate to say this, but planet sized ships are certainly possible.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 04:13 AM
link   
I have seen, sober and first hand with a close friend, stars just sudendly shoot off to nowhere.

On one fishing trip, we actually saw two stars shoot off of one star.

For those of you that just pass all this off as BS, all I can say is that if you spend some time watching the night sky, you just may see something that is beyond reason and explanation. On the other hand, you may never see what I, and many others have seen. However, please realize that just because someone has not witnessed something first hand, is in no way proof that it does not exist. I expect more sightings, videos, and such like this, as our technology continues to trickle down to consumers.

Happy sky watching.



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by more_serotonin_pls
This is a very interesting video indeed. Makes such a nice change from the recent flood of youtube rubbish.

The object looks very large indeed, so I was wondering if anyone knows any way of calculating size based on a suggestion that it was in the upper atmosphere?

If NASA do help him out, I doubt they'll make it public, and they'll probably try to get him to sign some kind of non-disclosure agreement, so unfortunately, I have the feeling that we'll never get to the bottom of this.

Still, the video has put on thought into my mind, which is nagging me, despite my belief in ET's and UFO's:

Why on earth do they just bob about so much? Think about planes - they are going somewhere - so are helicopters - following a fixed course most of the time.

Are they shouting 'look at me, look at me?'

It's bugging me at this early hour - 6.50am in the UK.

Still - flagged!


Let's say the alien craft is making a vortex like descent into our atmosphere, who knows how the craft is designed and how it reacts to friction and what impact it may have on the surrounding atmosphere. While watching the video it almost looks like the movements are random but that can be the vortex created around the craft or the actual craft itself - the craft can also be spinning.


Which is best for describing how aircraft get the needed lift to fly? Bernoulli's equation or Newton's laws and conservation of momentum? This has been an extremely active debate among those who love flying and are involved in the field. If the question is "Which is physically correct?" then the answer is clear -- both are correct. Both are based on valid principles of physics. The Bernoulli equation is simply a statement of the principle of conservation of energy in fluids. Conservation of momentum and Newton's 3rd law are equally valid as foundation principles of nature - we do not see them violated


hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...


[edit on 19-1-2008 by tangent45]



posted on Jan, 19 2008 @ 05:07 AM
link   
Why are you lot so obsessed with this video, you clearly are missing the point of the light reflection from the star in the first place, the light reflection moves then goes all together and the size of the object is massive. Maybe NASA writes these ones off for a reason? The reason being you can clearly see light reflection already?



new topics

top topics



 
50
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join