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.

 

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

page: 8
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by redshirt0202
 


Yes, its caused by a bright light, it could be a mini star or a craft
floating by at high potential that the UV sensitive cameras caught.

That means the UFO emanated or caused UV surrounding radiation,
a flying X-ray machine or even a higher sustained static potential
is involved.




posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by samureyed
 


Great Eye!

This is confirmed, one object moves in front of the tether at 7 Seconds into the clip.



To save bandwidth, I'm linking to the same image, with an arrow, to be specific about which object I'm seeing.
img229.imageshack.us...

-WFA

Edited to provide marked image link.

[edit on 21-3-2008 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on Mar, 21 2008 @ 11:52 PM
link   
And here at 16 Seconds in, another object on roughly the same trajectory, appearing to be roughly the same size, passes behind the object.



Link to marked image, with arrow on object passing behind tether:
img262.imageshack.us...

Edit for the marked link.

-WFA

[edit on 21-3-2008 by WitnessFromAfar]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 08:42 AM
link   
NO IT IS NOT SOVLED.

Watch what you read people and who it is by. The NASA Tether Incident is real. There is other NASA fotage from different STS Missions and different years Showing the exact shape UFO's over the Earth Atmosphere doing differnt things, but they are the same. Last year the Shuttle Atlantis had to stay in space 3 days longer because of several objects that were just like those seen in the NASA Tether Incident.

Watch again the film for yourselves folks the NASA Tether Incident...
search.yahoo.com...

Some of them MOVED BEHIND THE TETHER FROM 90 MILES AWAYS!!!
That is a fact. And when they fotage is slowed down, you can see that the UFO's are releasing waves of high energy.

Dont let anyone tell you what your seeing, you know what your seeing. Open your eyes, your hearts and your minds. Look at them. It does not take a rocket scientist to tell you what you are seeing.

The OPINION and obvious cover up of this most revealing footage is another attempt by your uncle sam controlled NASA to hide the truth.

Do a search for NASA Tether Incident & The Dogon Tribe (Africa).
It is my strong belief based on Sumerian Text and an particular story with in them which states that the God "Anu" of the Annunaki on the parting of Earth going back to their home world the "12 th Planet or Planet X", ordered that 300 be left behind to gaurd the skys and heavens over the Earth as a GUARD and 600 be left on the Earth to MANAGE IT.

The UFO's I believe are the Annuaki servents which we know as the Alien Greys, which by the way the Sumerians described using in compairison our own words, as being "Robotic Like" and having the same appearance as we know in this time with the bubble head and large oval eyes.


Read about the Sumerian text concerning aliens and ufo's. Read about the Annuaki and their servents. We were first created as a slave race for minning and other works. T
Summary...
1. 300 Left to gaurd the skys are the UFO's we see today.
2. 600 Left to manage the Earth have blood lines tide to our leaders.
Facts. 38 American presidents blood lines can be traced to Europeon Monarchs, Europeon Monarchs blood lines can be traced to Roman Emperors, Roman Emperors blood lines can be traced to Egyptian Pharohs, and Egyptian Pharoh blood lines can be traced to Sumerian Kings. It is a rule of blood lines on this planet from the Annuaki left behind.
Another note: it is popular belief that Reptillian like beings rule secretly over our earth. The Annuaki described their gods as being Reptillian like.
China believed that their Emperors were decended from Reptillian gods.
India believed that their Kings were decendents of Reptillian like beings called NAGA. Hoppi Indians believe that Reptillian like beings came down to Earth and mated with their women, they called the their Serpent Brothers. The list goes on and on.

Understand that Reptillians love warmth. Their is suppose to be a return of Planet X which is the Annuaki home world. Reptillians, lizards, etc, love warth. Our planet is being Terriformed by us unknowingly for their return through Co2. Their is alot more behind that fact. When the Annuaki decided it was time to start prepairing the Earth for the return of their people, they gave Nicola Tesla visions to create machines which were used to speed up the Industrial age. You may to to find more, but Read...

www.teslasociety.com...
Nicola Tesla never had an engineers degree or Electricity training.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Krumm
Some of them MOVED BEHIND THE TETHER FROM 90 MILES AWAYS!!!
That is a fact. And when they fotage is slowed down, you can see that the UFO's are releasing waves of high energy.

Dont let anyone tell you what your seeing, you know what your seeing. Open your eyes, your hearts and your minds. Look at them. It does not take a rocket scientist to tell you what you are seeing.
I agree, that is why I will ignore what you just said, that it is a fact that the objects move behind the tether and that the "UFO's are releasing waves of high energy".


You see, I always look at any video with my own eyes and I try to ignore the people who try to bend my opinion before I see the video, telling me what I should see. That is also one of the reasons I usually see these kind of videos with the sound turned off, because there is usually some kind of text or music to put us in the right mood.

That is why I thought of making my little experiment to see if a small out of focus light could look like it was behind a string that was farther away, and the experiment showed that it is possible for an out of focus small light to look like it passes behind another object that is far behind it.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Bill Gates has no degree in computers.

Tesla did graduate from a University and went beyond any electrical
physical achievement as he demonstrated devices the British had
no clue how to make in 1892, 400 years after Columbus discovered
America.

His flying ship designs have been hidden away like test answers.

Gates is to computers and money without a degree as
Tesla is to engineering and greedy money bag elites with a degree.


NASA does not know what happened and neither will any one else
tell the truth... its like test answers.

The luminous dual beam you call a tether is seen at normal aircraft
altitudes, in low earth orbit in rarefied air the effect is greater.

You are seeing UV light in those cameras.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Wow, I didn't think it would be so hard for people to grasp the concept that light acts as a wave, and waves bend around objects.

People, try these 2 simple experiments:

Experiment 1:
Materials: 1 Camera with high digital zoom

Procedure: Locate Venus at night, zoom in as much as you can.

Expected Results: You will see something like the following:


Conclusions: You just proved diffraction. A point source is an object that's really far away, or a very small object that's close by, and there will be diffraction if the light that the point source emits encounters an obstacle. If the obstacle has a round aperture, then we get diffraction that looks like this:
or if your camera had a really crazy resolution

In your camera, this effect is actually pretty small, but when you use digital zoom, then the diffraction pattern is amplified, and voila, you see a 'flying saucer'.

In the tether video, if we have small particles floating around the camera, and if the camera is focused on the tether, which is really far away, then diffraction would make the small particles look huge.

Experiment 2:
Materials: A telescope(or in the worst case, binoculars), and a very thin stick.

Procedure: Use you telescope to see anything at all, as long as it's far away, say more than a mile away. As you look through the telescope, have your friend move the stick in front of the aperture of the telescope.

Expected Results: zOMG the stick looks transparent in front of the telescope, or if you use a really powerful lens piece, the stick can't be seen at all!!

Conclusions: You just proved diffraction a second time. Basically, since light acts as a wave, when it encounters an obstacle, it will bend around it, meaning that the objects that are far away will still be visible even if there is a small obstacle in between the lens and that object.




Implications of both experiments: No freaking way in the world to tell if we are looking at large obects passing behind the tether, or small objects(close to the camera) passing in front of the tether.

Is the mistery solved? Yes: We either are looking at huge objects passing behind the tether, or very small objects passing in front of it. Any further analysis is just impossible - in other words we have nothing, and trying to prove the opposite is just ridiculus.


[edit on 22-3-2008 by daniel_g]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 


Daniel, I applaud your efforts, but you cannot change anything on this subject.

WG3



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 


daniel_g

A star for your effort in trying to explain these things.

If I could I would give you another star for correctly spelling "voila", but only if you are from the US.



Edited because of wrong wording.

[edit on 22/3/2008 by ArMaP]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 


Sorry to contradict you daniel_g, but small bright out of focus lights are seen as disks regardless of diffraction. Just basic optics. The tether is way out of focus too, or else it wouldn't appear to be so thick.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by nablator
Sorry to contradict you daniel_g, but small bright out of focus lights are seen as disks regardless of diffraction. Just basic optics. The tether is way out of focus too, or else it wouldn't appear to be so thick.


You are right, basic optics tells you that small out of focus lights are seen as disks, but it doesn't tell you why. Advanced optics will tell you about Resolving Power and how it is ultimately limited by diffraction, and diffraction tells you why you see Airy Disks when you are out of focus.

And actually, if the aperture of your camera was rectangular, you wouldn't see disks, but a different pattern, once again, due to diffraction. Here is, for example, what you would see with a square aperture:
www.elettra.trieste.it...


Daniel, I applaud your efforts, but you cannot change anything on this subject.

WG3, I'm not changing anything. On one side you have people saying that there are objects going behind the tether, and on the other there is people saying that the objects are not going behind the tether. I tried to explain why the latter actually makes sence, nothing more.

So if we have two theories, and both make sence, and we have no way to disprove either, then which one do we pick? Neither, otherwise you might as well flip a coin and let it decide for you.

[edit on 22-3-2008 by daniel_g]

[edit on 22-3-2008 by daniel_g]



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by daniel_g
 


A Star for ya!

I've been trying to find some good reason to as why some objects go behind the tether, and others infront of it, in the same shape i might add.

And since we really have no specs of the camera or optics that is used, we do not have much to base anything on, what we do know however, that camera was specially equiped for this mission.

The optics might be different as to them we normally use, and there could also be effects that are, not normal to what we are used to be seeing.



posted on Mar, 22 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   
Daniel, excellent post! A star from me!

Would you perhaps like to illustrate how this trick works using the photos I posted of the negative video clip?

Thanks for sharing your institutional knowledge with us.
This one part of your explanation was the only part that puzzled me.


Originally posted by daniel_g
Conclusions: You just proved diffraction a second time. Basically, since light acts as a wave, when it encounters an obstacle, it will bend around it, meaning that the objects that are far away will still be visible even if there is a small obstacle in between the lens and that object.



Yes that's absolutely true, however, this explanation actually seems to argue against the possibility of seeing one of these 'objects' pass in front of the tether at all. Yet we see this. Are you suggesting that diffraction only works some of the time? I'm not trying to be rude, just curious about this phenomenon.

-WFA



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 08:47 AM
link   
reply to post by WitnessFromAfar
 


The only discs we see 'in front' of the tether image are those which are closer to their focus. Since the particles are at slightly differing distances from the camera, they focus at slightly different settings. You see the small points/discs passing in front but none of the large, badly focussed ones do. Again it's the effect of diffraction and relative intensity. The parallax seen between movement of the tether and discs when the camera is shifted confirm that the discs are all much closer to the camera than the tether. The parallax is an irrefutable giveaway.

WG3



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by waveguide3
The only discs we see 'in front' of the tether image are those which are closer to their focus. Since the particles are at slightly differing distances from the camera, they focus at slightly different settings.


True, I'd also have to guess that not all particles are the same size, and the bigger ones can be resolved by the camera better. Of course this whole thing probably gets a lot messier if we take in account the intensity of the light reflected by the particles towards the camera, which may be independent of the size and distance of each object.

For example, imagine the ball on the picture I posted as a source of red light. If the intensity of that source is the same as the intensity of the refracted(green) light, then we will see a yellow image. If the intensity of the red source is much greater than the diffracted light, then we see red, and finally, if the intensity of the diffracted light is much greater than the source, then we see a green image.

If the two sources are the same color, then the intensity dictates which object we see in front of the other in the image.

[edit on 23-3-2008 by daniel_g]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by waveguide3
 


Daniel, thanks for the follow-up! That makes a lot of sense, and we would expect to see different sized particles in debris from the snap.

So I guess we're left with the one truly unexplainable part of this footage now, which I'd love to hear your thoughts on.

The behavior of these 'objects', how some slow down, some stop, and some change direction.

In WaveGuide3's post, linked above, he agrees here:
"I don't think I can explain why the particles go in different directions, but nor can anyone else. We can see that they do, but we don't understand why. I don't think that is a good enough reason to apply exotic rationale like ET or mile wide spaceships. We should search for reasons we can prove, not for reasons we can't."

While I firmly believe that mainstream science PREDICTS EBE's, and they're existence (given their possible time for evolutionary development, and technological development could be billions of years...) in our local space, I'll concede to Waveguide3 that it could be argued as an 'exotic rationale'.

I think 'the exotic rationale argument' is a mindset Earthlings are currently ruled by, that will one day be proven as ridiculous as the 'world is flat' way of thinking. But that's beside the point here, for the sake of argument, I'll agree to call the rationale 'exotic', and I wholeheartedly agree that we should seek reasons that we can prove.

So we're all in agreement that we don't know why they act in these strange ways, I think that what many of us are having trouble understanding is how Debris from the tether snap could be acting in such ways.

I'll go on to say that the physics many of us have illustrated in this thread already (your own points included Daniel and Waveguide3) tend to argue against debris behaving in any way not described in Newtonian Physics (factoring in just a pinch of Einstein due to Earth's gravity having an effect on the tether).

Once again (I know it's hard to tell on a message board) I don't mean to be rude, or act like I'm 'grilling' you. Just looking for your ideas on the explanation behind the movement of these objects, and the strange patterns we see in this footage. As of now, I can't explain it with debris. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.

-WFA



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 03:37 PM
link   
There is nothing unknown about static electricity, what is unknown is the suppression to experiment and most definitely any funding.

Why should elites fund or promote something they already have and
developed.

Stupid. Fund what we already know is stupid but funding to making others
stupid is worth it.



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by daniel_g
You are right, basic optics tells you that small out of focus lights are seen as disks, but it doesn't tell you why. Advanced optics will tell you about Resolving Power and how it is ultimately limited by diffraction, and diffraction tells you why you see Airy Disks when you are out of focus.

You are mixing up two different things. You don't see Airy disks when you are out of focus. Is there a series of concentric rings around the disks? No. What we are seeing is focal blur, perfectly explained by geometric optics. Small lights produce an area of confusion with sharp boundaries, the same shape as the aperture. As you can see from the images that you posted yourself, the boundary of Airy disks is completely different.

Before you lecture people on how light bends around objects try to educate yourself a bit, and understand why the results of your two experiences have nothing to do with diffraction.

Read these for example: focus, Airy disk and circle of confusion.

[edit on 2008-3-23 by nablator]



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by WitnessFromAfar
So I guess we're left with the one truly unexplainable part of this footage now, which I'd love to hear your thoughts on.
The behavior of these 'objects', how some slow down, some stop, and some change direction.

Could you please tell me where and when this happens? I've been watching the "NASA STS-75 Tether Incident UFO" Google video and the "UFO NASA's unexplained tether overload incident" YouTube video and can't locate it. My tired eyes are not too good these days I guess.

About the snap debris, sorry if the idea has already been shot down, but why can't they be ice particles from urine or grey water jettisoned from the space shuttle, floating close to the window?



posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by nablator
 


I posted this one page two Vid Post

It shows one of these whatever they are, passing the tether in a weird way...




top topics



 
12
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join