BREAKING DISCOVERY!! 1986 Shuttle Challenger Disaster (2 UFOs??)

Originally posted by ATS-38
I believe that Sgt. Hightower's observation is correct.

Two orbs were present during the STS-51 shuttle launch.

This is not the first orb spotted during a shuttle launch.

youtube.com...


Nice find Sgt.

This is a much better video and is consistent with objects we have seen. Maybe data gathering probes or sightseers? Good reference.

The stills did not impress me as much as this.

And, if this is spliced
UFO & Shuttle
and as you say faked, how is it when he is videoing the object how does he have the presence of mind to say "It saw the Space Shuttle going out."??

This was not Columbia, but another launch. "inpectocrud" is not a good source for your argument. He is a complete ameture with an off the cuff uneducated and opinionated statement.


I don't buy your dismiss of this yet. I need better evidence this was faked. Too fast on the draw there partner.
Both these videos are better evidence than the stills. Need the original video for that.

jackcowboy,
I'm a professional and also do CGI. Please explain your reasons for why this is fake. Be specific for us please. That's professional.

ZG


[edit on 2/9/2008 by ZeroGhost]

Very nice find OP after all these years! Starred for sure.

However, I'll go with my initial gut after watching it twice from start to finish, and seeing the lights you described, twice in the first viewing, then on 4 seperate occassions on the second viewing, and they all seem to be camera glitches/static to me.

Again though I will need to watch it some more, and maybe after some people with more video expertise weigh in I could very well change my mind.

But just for the simple fact that this happened over 20 years ago, I remember watching it in my 5th or 6th grade classroom in NY, they wheeled a TV into all the classrooms to play it live.

Sad day, when i think of it now I feel the worst (well besides for the people on board and thier family), the teachers in these classrooms, trying to explain to 11 year olds what happened, when most of us thought something looked wrong but didn't 'get it', so we most all looked at the teachers with wide eyes saying "Was that supposed to happen"? Dunno how they answered us, the day is crystal clear up until that post and it's one along with 9/11 I'll never forget where I was.

But excellent find 20 years later.

-btw I suggest everyone get a free copy of Winrar, it's an amazing little program that is to me winrar compares to winzip , like photoshop compares to MSpaint. It just that much quicker, and handles more file types,and volume I believe. So yea, search Cnet, or downloads. com or something, theres free versions of winrar, and alot of people and site use it for document compression nowadays.

But again conclusion for now camera glitches, but still will keep an eye on this great find, see if any video analysis comes out of it to proves whether or not my gut is correct.

I'm also wondering if you have studied any other camera angles from the ground, I've see 2 others right there to the right,on you tube(haven't watched em), but have you looked at those and noticed any objects similiar or otherwise, should be easy to look for the 1:10 obect on ther angles by synching all videos your examining by launch time. I would be extremely interested in any findings, because that would more or less rule out camera glitch. (not completely, but for the most part).



In closing,My feelings go out to the Astronauts on that ship, and thier loved ones.

[edit on 9-2-2008 by Nola213]

reply to post by ZeroGhost



Interesting video. As far as it being spliced. Well the author does say in the video description, after he lost site of the shuttle he turned his camera off. Then turned it on again when he noticed the round black object, (which I have no idea what it could be, looks fairly legit).

But he admits to turning camera off, then it appears a good while later as it's a bit darker, and a slightly different location(maybe), Then he turns camera on again, so there's the explanation of anyone saying splice.

Unless there is something within the 3 and a half minutes he's filming the uneventful black dot? that I missed, because I have a short attention span when it comes to looking at near stationary black dots .

Either way another interesting film.

But I'd like to see investgation of different camera shots of Challenger, and synching the up from lift off till the know objects, and looking at the new vantage points and see if anything can be spotted at those intervals.

To me that'd be the logical next step. Well either that, or to analize the Original video with better equipment and try and detemine if those are objects or camera glitches. Don't have the programs or knowledge to do the latter. but I might be able to give the former a go. but it'll have to wait till I get back from some shopping.

UFO DISINFO.

SORRY, THIS IS GETTING BORING..


Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.





[edit on 10-2-2008 by elevatedone]

Originally posted by lemetre
is this thread a joke?

i mean seriously...those are video dropouts, plain and simple.
back in the 80s those were quite common due to crappy analogue videorecording.

I agree with you, but I believe what we have here are a generation of UFO hunters unfamiliar with the technologies of the past. They seem to be analyzing these videos as if they were recorded in digital form, but as you pointed out, that is in fact not the case. These videos were shot in analog form on magnetic video tapes.

What people need to take into consideration with analog video is a term called generation loss. You see, when an analog tape gets copied, the copy isn't perfect. The new copy loses a little bit of the quality from the original tape.

So, even if the original video tape that made this shuttle launch recording was physically perfect, the original had to be played in an analog VTR and the output converted to digital to another tape in order to distribute it for the Freedom of Information Act. So, what we are seeing here is an digital conversion of an analog copy. And that's only a best-case scenario.

More than likely, the original video was copied multiple times that very same day this even happened. Those tapes were probably copied a few more times. Eventually this stuff was converted to digital tape. That's why this footage doesn't look so great: it has suffered generation loss multiple times before it was converted to digital.

The bottom line is, by the very nature of the video tape this footage was shot on will result in little glitches, or "drop outs" as we see in this video. They are NOT UFO's.

But, the parachute is something I've never seen before. And that is no glitch and totally worth discussing.

I'm a video professional.

I think what you're seeing is what was commonly referred to as "hits" in the tape. The tape you're looking at was no doubt Beta SP, an analog (pre-digital) format which has probably degenerated significantly over the past 2 1/2 decades, before it was encoded and made it to YouTube. In proper conditions (40 degrees Fahrenheit), video tape has an average shelf life of about 25 to 30 years.

I've looked at those blips pretty closely and I am pretty sure they are tape hits. Could be wrong, but let's apply Occam's razor.

Ha...sorry Harry Tuttle...didn't see your post before I posted.

You're right on...they're hits.

But the parachute thing is interesting.

ZeroGhost,

- And, if this is spliced
UFO & Shuttle
and as you say faked, how is it when he is videoing the object how does he have the presence of mind to say "It saw the Space Shuttle going out."??

Because the audio track is continuous and the video track is edited. That's clearly not even the same camera. The resolution is completely different and the white balance is completely different. If he was shooting in the same day and at the same moment you wouldn't see so much disparity between the white balance and resolution.

I don't believe what everybody is calling "the parachute" could possibly be a parachute. Why? It's too high and to be quite honest I do not believe it is going down (as the people in the video speculate). I think the feel of it going down is produced by the movement of the ascent column's movement. It appears to be stationary to me.

To that person who stated something about chaser planes and birds - yeah, okay. Nice hovering chaser plane. And HUMONGOUS bird.

Originally posted by wrangell76
Ok, I just found another video that explains the parachute coming down...when watching this video at 3:02minutes the parachute appears and is explained as search and rescue teams...

Here is the youtube video link...

www.youtube.com...

Actually, I just did some research and discovered that parachute was in fact from the Solid Rocket Boosters (SRB). ABC News was wrong about the rumor those were rescue teams, after all, the parachutes were first seen only 2.5 minutes after the explosion.

Here is a photo I found on Wikipedia of 2 SRB after a Discovery launch:



Here is a photo of an SRB coming down:


Here is a shot from the ABC news tape of just the chute and the nose cone (assuming the rocket disintegrated):

Great Pix. Especially of the rockets in the water. Thanks.

Regarding the shuttle - Could be real, could be fake. If commercials can have a 1952 Frank Sinatra next to, say, Bono, then anything can be made on video.

Keep 'em coming. Love the discussion, but there really just no way to tell for sure.

Bliss,

Bill Thuther

www.conspiracygrimoire.com...

Originally posted by Rhain
I watched the video and did notice a flash by at 54 sec in.

Here is what I seen.

Sorry to rain on everyone's parade but in television, those wee hits are what's called drop-outs. There's two typical causes:

1. A microscopic bit of dust in the tape path interfering with the playback head properly adhering to the tape at that particular instant

and

2. A bit of the tape's magnetic oxide coming off.

Neither qualifies the 'blips' as UFOs.

My dad has a copy of a Challenger video taken through a telephoto lens which I have watched many times. I certainly saw no U.F.O.s on it. What I saw was a red hot spot develop on a fuel tank, then it burnt though and the shuttle exploded. I was very small when this explosion happened, so I had no first hand look at it.

Originally posted by Terrylynn
My dad has a copy of a Challenger video taken through a telephoto lens which I have watched many times. I certainly saw no U.F.O.s on it. What I saw was a red hot spot develop on a fuel tank, then it burnt though and the shuttle exploded.

When you said that I instantly thought of this.



Check out 1:15 in the vid... see the resemblance?

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 10-2-2008 by IvanZana]

reply to post by ATSGUY


That is absolutely eerie because I was just thinking of that lastnight. If these really are aliens with advanced technology, wouldn't they try to help out in some way? They may not have been able to save the challenger but that doesn't mean they might not have intervened and gotten those people out of there.

The problem is that from what I've read and everything I remember, the bodies of the astronauts were found.. This is one link that states this..

history1900s.about.com...

There are also rumors of a "secret transcript" being discovered that tells what the astronauts were talking about while they sat helpless as they plummeted into the Atlantic. It can be located on multiple websites but I found it here:

www.blurofinsanity.com...

But how would they still be conscoius? Wouldn't the G-forces on the astronaut's bodies make them unconscious beforehand and/or kill them outright? Since their bodies (or at least some of their remains) were discovered, it proves that they died regardless of how.

-ChriS

reply to post by ATSGUY


She is a fake then, considering the fact that the planes that hit the world trade center was a remotely controlled military aircraft.
Watch Loose Change for proof.

reply to post by BlasteR


You are correct BlasteR.

In 1986 I personally saw a photograph taken by a Marine on the rescue vessel that recovered the part of the space shuttle where the astronauts were. The vessel was sitting on a dock, and, a minister of some sort was blessing the bodies.

The Marine's mother showed me the photo and said she had others at home. She said the others were too graphic to carry with her. She also said, that the astronauts did not die instantly from the explosion as we were led to believe. This might have been a "white lie" on NASA's part to save the families the added grief of the agony. I'm not sure why the lie persisted; but, it did.

The Marine's mother told me there were about 3 and a half minutes or so in between the first and last death. Most of them died either from lack of oxygen or decompression and one or two(?) died from a head blow from the blast concussion. I've forgotten the details to be exact here.

The Marine's mother was adament that I (we) not mention it as he had illegally taken the photos. He wasn't supposed to take pictures. Since it's been over 20 years now, I presume any secrets would be declassified by now.

I do not know the lady, didn't even know her in 1986 on a personal basis. I have no idea of her name, nor anyway to contact her to get copies of the photos.

Photos (very clear snapshots) do exist and her story does prove to me that the information in that second link you posted of the leaked transcripts is accurate and true.

reply to post by Sgt. Hightower


first of all mate its nearly imposable to see these light's so your going to have to enhance this greatly for anyone to start to believe it and secondly how did u even spot this when hardly anyone here can see it lol not meaning to sound sarcastic.

reply to post by Sgt. Hightower


I saw nothing out of the ordinary.
I think perhaps you are responding to the imperfections due to the film being over 20 years old.
Personally, I think that this is a stretch.
However, that doesn't make it so.
If you can provide us with something more substantial, say, some single frames of footage or some actual documents (admittedly, I'm in too much of a rush to read this entire thread), then perhaps I may see your side.

Originally posted by Valhall
Of course we know during the most unstable time of the Cold War - when the world was contantly on the brink of nuclear exchange - the UFO sightings were through the roof.

If that is a 'fact' ( i have no idea) have you ever heard anyone wonder if they were Human but not American? Why must all ufo's be alien or American?

And it has long been speculated by some that "they" were here to try to divert us annihilating ourselves.

Or it was the opposing side in the cold war trying to make a point perhaps?

But I guess it shows how slow I am on the uptake that I never considered the possibility that they knew BEFORE they visited that we were about to blow ourselves up...I kind of always considered that theory to be one where they got here and saw what flaming idiots we were and hung around.

If we are going to work from the assumption that like physics ( GR and it's basic 'as here, elsewhere, principle) life behaves much the same way everywhere i am pretty sure a truly alien civilization would have long ago simply conquered the planet ( how much violence, if any, would it really take ?) and installed human puppets to do their bidding.

And why are 'we' flaming idiots when the large majority of the world's population never elected their so called leaders? Can't we wait for the day that democracy truly reigns before we judge humanity?

lol

It's an interesting idea. It would require marrying ETs with time-travel! w00t!

If they MUST be alien i suppose we will have to make time travel possible...

Stellar