STS-75 (tether) Extended analysis (many sterwing objects), page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times


reply posted on 2-3-2008 @ 09:48 AM by ArMaP
Originally posted by PureET
If you where really holding that string behind your PocketPC, wouldn't the PocketPC block the light of the string? Yes it would since it is BEHIND the light source.
Yes, it did block the light, but the big red circle that we see on the video is not real, it's the result of the way the camera works when filming an out of focus light.

The light becomes much larger than it really should be and it appears to cover a big area, when in fact it is just a small light.

In the photo I posted that was not easily perceptible, but if you see the video,
here, you can see that the upper part of the string is covered by something that is not visible. That is the PocketPC.

In the end of the video you can see that I really had the PocketPC in front of the string.

This looks like you are fabricating false arguments.... Explain?
No, I am trying to explain to the people that do not understand how an out of focus light appears on a video how that happens.

If at least one person learns something with it then it was worth it, even if those that are too lazy or that are afraid to prove themselves wrong by doing an experiment think that I am misleading them.


reply posted on 29-3-2008 @ 01:39 AM by zorgon
Okay I have a few questions...

Before I go into the STS 75 footage I want you all to look at THIS ONE




Observe the first one that comes in from the right... As it gets over the Thunderstorm it suddenly BRIGHTENS.... then it STOPS and remains stationary above the storm...


The NASA infrared camera is watching it....
Then a second one APPEARS out of the storm, also suddenly bright....

Meanwhile the first one is STILL stationary above the storm, and stays with the storms as the Earth rotates away from the shuttle....

The NASA camera man has not forgotten the first one and at the end of the clip zooms in on the first one STILL over the storm.... but near the horizon now...

So Please answer me this...

How does a 'speck of dust' suddenly get brighter?
How does a 'speck of dust' STOP in space?
How does a 'speck of dust' suddenly appear from a cloud bank and move away?
Why does the NASA photographer zoom in on a 'speck of dust'

Now then before I comment on some really interesting observations in the Tether Incident I want you to watch THIS version... (don't know how many have seen this higher quality complete version )


Google Video Link


Okay now then...
at exactly 4:22 into the video a very large, bright and clear object enters from the left, moving in an arch across the top of the screen...

Again NASA photographer is following it... as it moves of the screen on the right, he zooms out to keep it in the screen...

Now explain to me HOW does this 'speck of dust' CHANGE DIRECTION?

When we first see it it is moving across the screen in an arc from left to right... as he zooms out the object now moves DOWN the screen

DUST AND DEBRIS CANNOT CHANGE DIRECTION NOR COME TO A STOP

And as was mentioned...

STS- 80 Formation over Africa


Google Video Link


I too would like an explanation of this one...






[edit on 29-3-2008 by zorgon]


reply posted on 1-2-2009 @ 12:26 AM by depthoffield


reply posted on 1-2-2009 @ 04:41 PM by waveguide3
I also believe Mr Sereda is a showman selling flim-flam. His theories are flavoured with applications of 'quantum physics', so you'd suppose he was at least a graduate in the field. Apparently, he spent the first decade of his career planting trees when, on his own admission, he had lots of time to think about stuff like this.

Anyway, without getting into floating ice particles and controversial things, there's one feature of his 'quantum craft' which isn't arguable and really does need an explanation. It concerns the 'notch', that square shaped bit cut from the edge of his flying saucers. They all have one and he acknowledges this and actually draws the notch on his blackboard demonstration.

When we watch the STS-75 tether videos, we see lots of Sereda ships with notches. But there's an intriguing facet that David really ought to address. The notch can be top/left, top/right, bottom/left or bottom/right or they can be some position in between these. But they are always located according to the ship's location in the movie frame. That's irrefutable and clear enough for anyone to see.

The notches are always in the same position on ships located upper left. They're in a different place for ships seen upper right, or lower left or lower right. And all ships follow the rule. What's more, a notch will migrate from one position to another as a ship crosses the frame. You can watch the notch.

The reason for this phenomenon is optics and lens design. The notch is the result of internal construction of the zoom lens. And it's been demonstrated by experiment. A zoom lens of certain construction will create a notch on the edge of the light disc created from a defocussed point source (such as a bright star, Venus, etc).

It's all on YouTube for anybody interested enough to investigate.

So the notches have a simple optical explanation. The 'behind the tether' argument has a simple optical explantion. So what is there left of Mr Sereda's ships to believe in?

WG3



reply posted on 1-2-2009 @ 11:14 PM by depthoffield
similar kind of notch, with explanations in the info of the movie:




direct link: www.youtube.com...


And, as Waveguide3 said, the notches are just a lens effect, an image artifact depending on the position of the defocused disk in the frame, i mean look here:

www.freewebs.com... ,

dismiss the language but see the pictures, when different disks with notches have exactly the same notches when in the same area on the frame. I exemplified with three zones named A, B, C then I numbered different disks, and see how the notchces are "obedient" when in the same zone.

3 miles alien spacecrafts? No, little particles of space-debris floating around.
And Sereda as a con-man.


Originally posted by waveguide3
So what is there left of Mr Sereda's ships to believe in?

Maybe his charisma ?





[edit on 1/2/09 by depthoffield]


reply posted on 8-2-2009 @ 07:02 AM by jackphotohobby
reply to post by easynow


The objects were not lit by a constant source of light. If they were small objects such as dust they would likely have an irregular surface which would cause variations in the light as the object moves and/or the light source changes. The variations in the light would present themselves as pulsating bokeh. It would be the same with any video camera with a catadioptric lens, in any wavelengths of light, set on an object in infinity (a tether, for instance) with dust being lit close to the lens. Anywhere in the universe. Possibly in other universes too.



reply posted on 8-2-2009 @ 07:06 AM by RFBurns
Originally posted by depthoffield
take a look at this post:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
in fact it demostrates exactly the oposite as what to say: the notches are the same when different orbs are in the same area of the frame.
Don't be ignorant of this.


You mean the same repetitive few frames back and forth proves the lens theory?

Sheesh...now you skepts are getting desperate arent you?!!!

Its not being ignorant...its being aware of what is byond your little box of padded walls so the world outside of it wont hurt you.

No worries, every single bit of your examples were shot down 9 years ago by a NASA/JPL engineer on another forum. This issue with sts75 began the very day it was seen on NASA TV. Long...LONG before ATS, long before any of this recent debating. It has not been proven either way, to be UFO/Life Forms or your favorite dust particles.

But the evidence to date seriously outweighs your dust by about a factor of 20.



Cheers!!!!


reply posted on 8-2-2009 @ 07:10 AM by easynow
reply to post by jackphotohobby



yes that is certainly a possibility no doubt but

if these are critters producing their own glow and they were in fact pulsating the same look would be in the video.

the real question here is if these are not ufo's or critters...

why does NASA not let us see the rest of the footage if there is nothing to hide ?

is this really a national security threat or not ?


reply posted on 8-2-2009 @ 07:16 AM by RFBurns
reply to post by easynow



If NASA was to allow us to see the entire footage, that would ruin NASA's reputation of decades of "nothing to see move along" point of view they have pounded into everyone.

Plus they still believe in Brookings, that we cannot handle the truth.

Well...that might be true...to a point..especially for the skeptics. They cant handle the truth. It ruins the status quo and their paradyme, changing their tiny world and turning it inside out.

Its the "oh dear cats live with dogs" syndrome.

Shame.



Cheers!!!!


reply posted on 8-2-2009 @ 07:20 AM by easynow
reply to post by RFBurns




yes they are hoping we all just move along but there are some people like me that won't !

i really cannot understand the reasoning behind NASA not letting this type of footage out for the public to see. there is no logic in that unless there is something to hide...simple as that.

if Obama wants to make the Goverment more transparent then a good place to start would be with NASA imo.

we are paying for all this and we are not allowed to see the real stuff.

sad
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Aliens Among Us ...Video
  Posted 8 days ago with 65 member flags
Moon: inexplicable phenomena. Luna Cognita video.
  Posted 16 days ago with 60 member flags
UFOs \'Escort\' Mexican Aircraft - Radar Confirmed.
  Posted 11 days ago with 31 member flags
The Dyatlov Pass Incident--Russia\'s Mountain of Death
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags
The Aurora, Texas UFO Incident (1897)
  Posted 2 days ago with 27 member flags

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:

Free Psychic Readings
  General Chit Chat, Posted 14 hours ago, 106 replies
Hollow Earth Theory New Evidence.
  General Conspiracies, Posted 12 hours ago, 68 replies
Anonymous show your face!
  Rant, Posted 8 hours ago, 61 replies
Free will
  Philosophy and Metaphysics, Posted 16 hours ago, 50 replies