STS-75 Tether Incident - Mystery solved! Breaking News!

originally posted by: redshirt0202
Hey!

This is probably the 3rd thread I'm starting today but what the heck!

I have always been amazed by the STS-75 (tether Incident) and the STS-80 (Formation over Africa) videos.

But I think that I can safely say that the UFOs in the STS-75 footage were nothing more than lens artifacts.

Proof is here :

Youtube Video


Description :

The 'ufo' first appears as a white dot around 44 seconds, once the camera zooms in the light turns into a shape very similar to those seen in the STS-75 footage.

NASA said that it was only dust that was out of focus and that it only looked like the 'disks' passed behind the tether. This makes sense to me now after watching the footage 3 billion times. Has anyone noticed that ALL the 'spacecraft' pass behind the tether!!!!

I think atleast one or two 'spacecraft' would've passed infront of the tether so it's probably really just an illusion that they pass behind it.

Here's a screencap for those people at work that can't watch youtube :

Picture 1

Picture 2

Someone may have mentioned it but they also proved it was lens related distortion on ufo hunters.
They were able to re-create the illusion of saucer shaped objects being behind an object that was in the foreground of the frame. Bill Burns still insisted on calling them "crafts" anyways. Ugg.

Someone may have mentioned it but they also proved it was lens related distortion on ufo hunters.
They were able to re-create the illusion of saucer shaped objects being behind an object that was in the foreground of the frame. Bill Burns still insisted on calling them "crafts" anyways. Ugg.

Hi joelr. Lol I see now this thread is kinda old. And I'm new here. But anyway...

I strongly disagree that the debunking attempts (I've seen 3 of them on video) do debunk the critters to dust.

I sure regard these debunking attempts to be relevant evidence, but not proof for the critters being just dust.

What these debunking attempts do provide is proof of that optical illusions do exist. Not that the tether incident objects are close by camera, or can't be far (70+ miles) from camera.

originally posted by: JimObergWhat was Sereda's explanation for why the swarm waited so many days before showing up?

Hi Jim, we don't need to get into the pacman critters (or NASA for that matter), being "too late", NASA telling/hiding truth... etc...
Those who do not just want to believe can still study the evidence, and which is in the form of footage and data that floats around on the web.

originally posted by: JimObergGood thought on the notches.

Thx

All that science appears to be proving here is that we can replicate the phenomena seen during the tether incident, not necessarily that it offers definitive proof that the tether incident is due to a specific cause.

Additionally, science is constantly proving science wrong in all spheres of research, mainly because scientific methods are fundamentally flawed by very virtue of the tools available to the researchers at any given time, so scientific method and design is always changing with new technology and understanding.

Today science tells us they're dust particles, tomorrow it's dandruff, next week it's aliens hula hooping around Saturn.

originally posted by: wotyathink


Hi Jim, we don't need to get into the pacman critters (or NASA for that matter), being "too late",....

I think we do, especially since most folks who are mystified by this video

a] think the swarm showed up right after the tether broke
and
b] think the video was shot at night and the objects are self-illuminated.
and
c] think that the TV images are the only recorded images of the tether and dots

Until such fundamental misconceptions are cleared up I don't see how anybody can think they have a reasonable explanation for the scenes.

originally posted by: doom8gloom

this is all the proof needed to verify ufo do exist.
you dont have to like it. watching the official footage and listening to
the radio transmissions says it all. nasa and the crew where suprised to say the least.

As you conceive of the event, how long has gone by since the break, and what is the shuttle crew doing during this interval? How long did they observe and image the tether?

originally posted by: Sunraged
All that science appears to be proving here is that we can replicate the phenomena seen during the tether incident

Except for the pulsating real stuff, that sounds correct. And also agreed with the other points you're making.

But the experiment(s) only seeks to replicate the close-up tether footage. The experimenters don't touch the other sequences and that are showing details that indicate the critters are crossing the tether-line in two distinct different ways.
It isn't that easy to catch but it's there nevertheless and I wonder why it's been ignored by most.

Let me illustrate with some images/text.


video sequence


Next example shows opposite pattern


(same video sequence as above can be used as this image comes only seconds later)


These 4 images and video sequence should be evidence of the critters crossing the tether-line in two different ways.
Most critters that do cross the tether line clearly do so as demonstrated in the second example - you don't see them while they cross the tether.
One more example of a critter that deforms the tether line when crossing:


video sequence


It may not be proof of different critters passing both in front and behind the tether. But it IS the tether incident footage, not an attempt to replicate selected footage.

a reply to: wotyathink

Tell wotIthink you like many others on here don't understand the problems of the resolution and contrast in this video.

It's been shown that the optics cause the shapes and that what happens can be replicated.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: wotyathink

don't understand the problems of the resolution and contrast in this video.

Exactly which problem do you think of concerning the relevant "issue" mentioned in the post you replied to?

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: wotyathink

It's been shown that the optics cause the shapes and that what happens can be replicated.

Oh yes I'm sure that optics do shape-shift a bunch of stuff. That's why dust and fishingline can shapeshift into pacman critters? That wasn't the point though..

a reply to: wotyathink

Interesting observation, thought-provoking.

Do you think the objects are self-luminous or sunlit?

Why do you think the swarm showed up at this point, days after the initial break and the tether's departure from shuttle vicinity?

How visible would you postulate such objects could be from Earth's surface?

originally posted by: wotyathink....
Oh yes I'm sure that optics do shape-shift a bunch of stuff. That's why dust and fishingline can shapeshift into pacman critters? That wasn't the point though..

Exactly. So wouldn't inspecting the 70-mm crew handheld shots be helpful?

originally posted by: JimOberg

Interesting observation, thought-provoking.

Thanks again, Jim!

Your questions are really interesting too, but make for another, probably more speculative, discussion in another topic.

My main point here was to put the STS-75 pacman critter debunk replications where they belong. They are kinda overrated compared to the real stuff seen in OTHER TETHER VIDEO SEQUENCES, agreed?
And just so it's mentioned; I do not have friends in high places *suggesting* lets stick to the footage everyone is familiar with and which the debunking attempts also are based on..

Next debunk effort should be the replication of the phenomena as described in THIS POST - with the dust being close, say meters, to camera, and the light source far, say miles, away.

Or wotyathink is reasonable Jim?

originally posted by: JimOberg

Exactly. So wouldn't inspecting the 70-mm crew handheld shots be helpful?

This video should be very helpful indeed! Lets see...

The object seems real enough and, at least, miles away from where the shot is been taken. Airport? Star? whatever...

It appears to be something that emits light. The incoming light is then corrupted by the cam and voila there's the proof that cameras can transform distant light emitting "stuff" into pacman critters.

Meaning there probably is no pacman critter. But there should be a light source

Could it be a distant dust particle or ice crystal that reflects sunlight (gotta be a damn good handheld then - and which it obviously isn't)

Well it's relevant at least.., but debunking distant objects/light sources this way? Absolutely not Jim.

On my website I have links to several hours of NASA TV around the time of the three observation periods, with the official scene list of every video sequence shown -- there is no other 'tether video'. Look it over.

www.jamesoberg.com...

originally posted by: JimOberg
On my website I have links to several hours of NASA TV around the time of the three observation periods, with the official scene list of every video sequence shown -- there is no other 'tether video'. Look it over.

www.jamesoberg.com...

Thanks for link to additional footage. Bad quality though compared to Martyn Stubbs stuff.
Seen some of it earlier.

For the record: I wrote "other tether video sequences".
I myself divide the tether footage into 3 different zooming sessions.

The debunkers seem to value the middle (close-up /zoom-in) sequence.

But it is the 2 distant sequences that may contain the best evidence for where the critters most likely are located....


Question: You seem to be very knowledgeable Jim. Why didn't you debunk the cam artifact video in the OP of this thread? I mean.., all it takes is an image of a pacman critter and the mob shouts "proof". Messes up things for good debunkers like you if let go unchallenged.

I'm not a one-man show, and I was curious to find out if other folks would mention it. There's a youtube video [search tether ufo zones] that demonstrates the notch clocking is a function of the circle's position in the field of view. I'm disappointed nobody linked to it.

I'm also dismayed that everybody seems to think the swarm appeared within minutes of the break, the arrival triggered by the break. It didn't -- the tether drifted away and the shuttle wasn't passing nearby until four days later. By then the shuttle was back to routine ops including periodic water dumps.

Had these objects been swarming for days, people on the ground would have seen them if they were as big as some guess based on the 'behind' interpretation.

a reply to: TheInfamousOne

What the hell? I was thinking the exact same thing.

This proves nothing sorry.

Here's one of the 70-mm handheld shots of the tether during the close approach four days after the break.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: wotyathink

originally posted by: Sunraged
All that science appears to be proving here is that we can replicate the phenomena seen during the tether incident

Except for the pulsating real stuff, that sounds correct. And also agreed with the other points you're making.

But the experiment(s) only seeks to replicate the close-up tether footage. The experimenters don't touch the other sequences and that are showing details that indicate the critters are crossing the tether-line in two distinct different ways.
It isn't that easy to catch but it's there nevertheless and I wonder why it's been ignored by most.

Let me illustrate with some images/text.

video sequence

Next example shows opposite pattern

(same video sequence as above can be used as this image comes only seconds later)

These 4 images and video sequence should be evidence of the critters crossing the tether-line in two different ways.
Most critters that do cross the tether line clearly do so as demonstrated in the second example - you don't see them while they cross the tether.
One more example of a critter that deforms the tether line when crossing:

video sequence

It may not be proof of different critters passing both in front and behind the tether. But it IS the tether incident footage, not an attempt to replicate selected footage.

Completely agree with you and thanks for posting that.

As I said before, science can give us the best explanation for something that the tools available to us at the time can allow us to arrive at. Unfortunately, we are as limited as we are liberated by that fact. There is also the risk that we generalise findings from specific experiments to form conclusions about things that haven't been tested.

The unfortunate thing about all of this, is that we won't really know until we know.

originally posted by: Sunraged....
The unfortunate thing about all of this, is that we won't really know until we know.

At the very least, you won't know what the alternative explanations really are until you know a lot more about the event itself, things that the UFO version promoters themselves either don't know, or don't want to tell you.

You have to know that the video encounter occurred FOUR DAYS after the tether broke, NOT in the minutes or hours immediately afterwards. Does everyone know that NOW?

You have to know that the videos were taken soon after sunrise in orbit, not in darkness. Does everyone know that NOW?

You have to know that the crew also took 70-mm handheld photos of the tether that also captured moving dots, but without the distortion of pixel bleed and overbright-gray-out that characterized the ruggedized exterior cameras. Does everyone know that NOW?

You have to know that the shuttle had resumed normal orbital maintenance operations days before the tether encounter, including normal waste water dumps as well as other fluid ejecta. Does everyone know that NOW?

You have to know the tether was hanging straight down with a slight bottom bend, and was seen from the ground by observers over succeeding weeks, with no reports or any extra objects nearby. Does everyone know that NOW?

You have to know that the encounter occurred in several successive sunrises as the shuttle overtook and passed the tether, and that ALL videos downlinked over that several hours period [with complete air-to-ground comm] are on youtube, with the full scene list documentation on my website, so nobody has to rely on only one biased information source. Does everyone know that NOW?

WITHOUT knowing these things, no conclusions reached to this point are reliable.