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.

 

UFO PROOF! You Missed The Disclosure!

page: 2
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
That is wrong, the outcome from an impact and how the objects involved is decided how much energy is involved in the impact, their mass and composition.


I don't think you are paying attention enough. When 1 object is stationary, and another moving object hits it. That stationary object has an instant change in velocity. After the moving object reflects off the once stationary object, it no longer effects it. This means the object that was once stationary, would keep its new velocity it recieved after the impact. It's new velocity should not change, it should be constant untill acted apon again.

But in the video, the velocity change of the UFO is NOT instant. It slowly gain's velocity over a period of time. This could only happen if it was being hit by multiple objects, each with a faster speed than the last one. This is not happening in the video. The UFO is gaining velocity from NO COLLSIONS.




[edit on 6-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]




posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 03:07 AM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 




These UFO's are not even close to the thrusters! Did you not see the camera ZOOM IN? If the UFO's were closer to the camera, then the pure action of zooming in would have made the UFO's leave the view!

As i am not a camera freak, and my knowledge in cameras are none, i recomend that you ask nablator about that.



Correction, it comes from the CENTER of the screen. The pure fact that the UFO became visible in less than a second time frame means that is was NOT A SLOW ROTATION.

And how long was it invisible before that second? You dont know that.
And how the reflection and the turn of visibility occurs has to do with the light source.



If the UFO was slowly rotating, I would expect the reflection to start from a dim light that slowly changes to a bright light. But we don't see a slow prgression of brightness, we see and INSTANT brightness, that I have timed AT LESS THAN 1 second.

As i said, that depends on where the light source comes from, and the possition of the camera to see where that light reflection begin.



Not only that, but if the object was rotating, then the brightness of the light would CHANGE. But the brightness stays completly the same!!

That is dependant on how fast it is rotating and what the surface is like.



Are you suggesting these are perfectly FLAT clear mirrors? How can a rotating piece of ice reflect a constant level or brightness? Especialy after it was just INVISIBLE??

As i just explained, that has to do with the surface of the ice.



Watch the video. It takes less than a second to go from INVISIBLE to VISIBLE. This means IF it was rotating, it would be rotating quite fast. But if it was rotating fast, it should have became invisible again, but it DOESNT.

So on that second you can measure how long it is being in the 'dark'?
Did you even consider how long it was invisible on the screen before it showed up, and where it was?



If it was rotating slow, it would probably not become visible so quickly, it would slowly become visible. The speed at which it appears on the video, is not like any "rotating reflection" that I have seen.

That depends on the size, doesn't it?
If it is small the reflection will occur faster than on a bigger object.



The UFO that you claim is "rotating ice" would have a DIFFUSE reflection, but in the video it appears to have a SPECULAR one.

It does?
And you see the object from several different angles here to make that judgement?



Your arguments are WEAK!

Perhaps.... Perhaps not.



I don't think you are paying attention enough. When 1 object is stationary, and another moving object hits it. That stationary object has an instant change in velocity. After the moving object reflects off the once stationary object, it no longer effects it. This means the object that was once stationary, would keep its new velocity it recieved after the impact. It's new velocity should not change, it should be constant untill acted apon again.

Yes agreed to, somewhat.
You have to calculate the mass and the speed of the object hitting this stationary object to get the energy from the collision, and then you know a bit on how the reaction will be.
Nothing happens instantly, it also depends on where the impact occurs on the surface of the object.



But in the video, the velocity change of the UFO is NOT instant. It slowly gain's velocity over a period of time. This could only happen if it was being hit by multiple objects, each with a faster speed than the last one. This is not happening in the video. The UFO is gaining velocity from NO COLLSIONS.

As i just explained it does not need to be instant.
Let's take this back to the shuttle explanation...
Let's say that they throttle the thrusters to full effect, will the shuttle react instantly to this? No, why?
It has to do with mass, the energy required to affect the shuttle is less than it's mass, and by that, the reaction will not be instant.

It is almost the same in a collision scenario, what it all depends on is the momentum, mass and the energy that will be exacted on the object it impacts on.
However that energy will be somewhat reduced, since both objects will develop energy when that impact occurs, and not to forget this "Force equals mass times acceleration" or "F=ma" for short.
And this "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction." .
So that means that the force from the impact will not be built up instantly but will take time as the energy from the impact spreads around the object itself.

So there will never be an instant reaction when the impact occurs.

[edit on 6-4-2008 by Balez]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Balez
And how long was it invisible before that second? You dont know that.


Seriously now Balez. I gave you only 3 different example of "teleportation", and they all look EXACTLY THE SAME. Keep in mind, there are MANY other teleporting objects in the video.







These three examples above are different objects, yet they all some how "instantly" appear into view, and they all look exactly the same. No difference in size, shape, brightness, or anything. The are all exactly the same, and show up the same. What are the chances of that??? YES, I DO know how long they were invisible. One or two of them were invisible the entire length of the movie, and don't show up untill a certain moment. When they do show up in the screen, they are STATIONARY. Some how, they gain speed...

So you are going out on a limb, and you are going to pass these off as ice crystals hitting each other and some how acceleraing and stopping. Which means you are insisting that these things are being hit multiple times, in order for them to do the maneuvers they are doing.

Do you understand how far fetched that is?

A UFO teleports in one spot, gains speed, slows down to a stop for a second, then slowly gains speed in the opposite direction, and leaves the screen completely lit, with he same exact brightness the entire time. The light did not "dim" one bit.

You are trying to tell me that a rotation made it go from invisible to visible, then you are trying to say that object got hit by multiple objects to make it gain speed slowly, then you are saying that same object collides with MORE things to some how make it perfectly slow down and come to a stop, then you are saying MORE collisions made to turn around, and MORE multiple collisions made it slowly GAIN speed. Keyword "GAIN" speed, not "INHERIT" speed.

Not only are you trying to saying 1 "ice particle" does this in the camera, but MULTIPLE ones do this.

That is by far the most ridiculous thing I have ever herd.

Do you know the chances of only 1 "ice particle" colliding with another to make it come to a COMPLETE STOP??? Naturally?

Have you ever played billiards before? Have you ever tried make a billiard ball come to a complete stop by using only another billiard ball? You would have to hit it exactly the opposite direction it is travelling, and exactly the correct speed to cancel out its movement. The chances of that happening naturally, 6+ times in the video, is ABSOLTULY REDICULOUS.




Originally posted by Balez
So on that second you can measure how long it is being in the 'dark'?
Did you even consider how long it was invisible on the screen before it showed up, and where it was?


Yeah actually. A few of the UFO's were in the dark for the entire length of the video before they suddenly teleported to the middle of the screen and then accelerated away with a speed faster than the speed they started with when they became visible.

Yup, quite a few of them were invisible for a while before they showed up.


Damn you know what? Some of those so called "ice particles" are travelling so fast, you would think it would be near impossible to get anything done. That sure is a lot of "ice particles" floating around. You would think that the majority of the vacuum of space is 70% ice.




Some peoples imaginations are wild. ICE LOL! Did you know that ICE would probably melt instantly if it was in contact with the Sun and it had no protection like an atmosphere to save it?

Did you know in outer space, dark is extreme cold, and light is extreme hot?

[edit on 6-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]

[edit on 6-4-2008 by ALLis0NE]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 


Like I said, it's amazing the lengths that some will go to to deny the most simple and obvious explanation - that these are either spacecrafts, or some kind of space "critter", living beings of some sort.

Oh and let's not forget that these "debris and ice particles" ONLY show up in the special Ultraviolet feed at Houston - the astronauts in the shuttle with an ordinary camera feed didn't see these at all!

Special Ultraviolet debris and ice particles?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I have been following the other thread going on regarding this issue, and I just wanted to weigh in on this. While lens distortion and or "ice or other particles" may account for some of this, the extreme apparent "teleportation" and the slow acceleration in space persuades me in favor of some other explanation. Don't know what these things are but I am inclined to not believe they are ice or similar particles.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Good post OP


The power of denial always amazes me. The UFOs in the Tether video glow and pulsate, materialize and dematerialize, stop and start, change directions etc - and yet there are many who go "well that couldn't be a fleet of massive ships in our space, that must be 'dust', or 'debris', or 'ice particles'......"


I am of the opinion this is just space debree and I think of myself as a true skeptic looking at both sides. When NASA asks the crew what the stuff swimming in the foreground was the crew said there is debree traveling along with them that is illuminated by the Sun and something about the angle they are from the sun. To me there doesn't appear to be anything intelligent about the debree movement most travel in straight lines. The outside force maybe gravity or have you not heard that if you look into the sun that your front side is positive 300 or so degrees and that your back side is negative 300 or so degrees. Seems like the pulsating could easily be caused by a spinning piece of debree getting hotter and then colder expanding and contracting. I would love to see some real concrete UFO evidence but to date I haven't really seen the smoking gun, this to me sure isn't a smoking gun.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I think this might just be a little way for all to see what is up there and them (NASA) just not saying.

Since I have been up there in one of there PODS (and I will say I thought it was the most interesting of my trips because) I learned they work in grids just like we do.

Imagine as you look at that.... all the life that is out there and that you have been denied knowledge of.

I would think if something broke loose from the shuttle it would interfere with there air travel so they would indeed need to check this out if nothing else then safety reasons.

One day Alice!



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by brickhouse32
To me there doesn't appear to be anything intelligent about the debree movement most travel in straight lines.



I can give you 6+ examples of "turning" debris. Some are instant 90 degree turns like in the OP, and some are gradual slow turns.

How on Earth can you explain that in a natural way? You can't.

I'm sorry guys, but if you are going to say these are just debris, please avoid posting on this thread unless you have some type of REAL argument that will clearly explain all these movements.

So far the only argument is "collisions" but even then, it would take multiple perfecly planned collisions to make some of these things move the way they are. "Collisons" are by far the least clear explaination of ALL, so it's best you move on to another arguement.

If you are just giving an opinion, please, save it. I herd them all. GIVE ME VALID EXPLAINATIONS.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
GIVE ME VALID EXPLAINATIONS.


There are none, ALLisONE


There is NO valid explanation for "debris" or "ice particles" which are totally invisible in an ordinary video feed, but visible in an Ultraviolet feed



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:17 AM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 

Where did you get that information that this was not visible on a common video feed and only visible in ultraviolet?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


In "UFO : Greatest Story Ever Denied", at about 20:50, Trevor James Constable goes over it and shows the two different video feeds, the regular feed that the astronauts are seeing and the UV feed that Houston is seeing.

The UFOs are totally invisible in the regular feed and the astronauts don't see anything!


[edit to add link and time, enjoy]

[edit on 6-4-2008 by MrdDstrbr]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 

Thanks.

Does this YouTube video show that?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 

You only see what you want to see, right? Don't make up things that can be checked easily. There weren't two cameras filming the tether at the same time. About the astronauts not seeing anything, does "there's a little debris that a.. kinda flies with us" sound like "there is nothing out there"?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 11:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 

So that's your idea of disclosure. This video is OLD. It's been discussed countless times since 1996 and debunked by NASA experts. Is it necessary to write in CAPITALS, ignore EVIDENCE and propagate LIES for the sake of SENSATIONALISM? I guess it's the best way to attract the attention of uneducated morons, who need leaders like Greer to think for them. It is also a very good way to avoid confrontation with serious researchers. Good luck to you.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by nablator
 


Well my understanding has always been that Houston was getting the UV feed, and the astronauts in the shuttle had their own regular feed, but you have a point; maybe the astronauts didn't have a video feed and were just looking out a window?


Still, all he says is "there's a little bit of debris that flies with us", he says nothing about the swarm of UFOs that materializes in out of nowhere, glows and pulsates, goes in all different directions, stops and starts, does U-turns etc etc



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by nablator
It's been discussed countless times since 1996 and debunked by NASA experts.


Oh wow, debunked by NASA experts?


And of course NASA has absolutely no reason to lie, withhold evidence or hire paid debunkers to discredit leaked evidence



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by nablator
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 

You only see what you want to see, right? Don't make up things that can be checked easily. There weren't two cameras filming the tether at the same time. About the astronauts not seeing anything, does "there's a little debris that a.. kinda flies with us" sound like "there is nothing out there"?


I think a reminder that this tether is 12 miles long is needed...those are pretty large particles, ice and debris floating around.

The movement flows around, in front and behind the tether. You would think that NASA would have been concerned over the large particles hitting the shuttle.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 


Never
A
Straight
Answer



I think the most interesting detail is that these objects are only visible in with the infrared lens. I saw the entire David Sereda video on this subject, had lots of similar footage with these strange objects moving around. We've all seen it, the question is are there recent videos with the infrared cam out there? Maybe we can find something in more recent footage.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 01:02 PM
link   
Hey has anyone offered any credible reasons how the 'object' could have appeared suddenly and also change direction. Interesting thread, I have seen the Sereda video as well and while agreeing with some theories about the tether objects, can't say I buy them all..now with this info..let's hear it guys.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Rhain
 


Oh no, not again. Could you please read the STS-75 tether incident thread first?

For those who don't want to read the long thread:
- Ice from waste water dump are very common, and stays around the Shuttle for days.
- Very close ice crystals way out of focus look exactly like the orbs, including the transparency of their circle of confusion.
- The accelerations affecting the floaters are constant, very weak, and several known forces can be the cause. There is no evidence of intelligent control.



new topics

top topics



 
36
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join