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: 5
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by ArMaP
 


Thank you ArMap. Your example and explanation made a lot of sense. I did notice in the video that very little if any appears to past in from the tether.




posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 


My apologizes to you for going off topic. It was my fault.

I do agree though that your examples do need further investigation as to how they suddenly appear.

I can only offer this explanation. The tether was created to collect ions in our upper atmosphere. Is it possible that it is gathering something as its drifting and releasing it. Which in turn is resulting in them getting a static charge of some sort making them just look like they are teleporting?



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALLis0NE
WTF???? Did you not even watch the videos or find the UFO's that is circled in my main post??!?

THEY ACCELERATE UP AND DOWN.

Do you know what acceleration means? Apparently not.
Just in case you don't, you can actually go up while the acceleration vector points down. It's called deceleration. All I see is a constant downward acceleration. I would appreciate it if you could point out a specific upward acceleration in the video. Thanks.


It's people like you that make me sick, you didn't even read the first post.. go away troll.

Calm down. Of course I watched the video many times. You would know it if you bothered to read the main STS-75 thread. This is a civil discussion forum. You don't have to be arrogant and aggressive.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by nablator
 

Speaking of which, what are the main STS tether threads that are active and more civil than this one (not much happening here due to the OP derailing things :shk: )?

I will go to those threads, I suggest any serious people do the same, thanks much.




[edit on 6-4-2008 by battlestargalactica]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by battlestargalactica
 

The STS-75 thread with very interesting discussions, continued long after the OP left.

This thread is mostly about the STS-48 footage.

I'm sure there are many other threads, but only these two have been active recently.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Oi oi, another repeat thread. These points have been brought up many times before.

Then again, we have a lot of new users since those topics started, so who knows. This is one of the few videos I think should be brought up constantly, not just because it is the best evidence, but because it shows how disparate debunkers are when they call them "ice particles".



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by maya12-21-2012.com
 


And you joined just to say that?

Or was it to use ATS as free advertisement? That is a suspicious behaviour...



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Nablator,

Unless I misunderstood what you meant in your one early post, I have a problem with something you wrote.

When you talk about waste water dump to me it sounded as if the Astronauts dump the waste water and this is I think what you were referring to about the ice crystals hanging around the shuttle for days????

Well, since I didn't know what you were talking about exactly I looked up shuttle wate water dump and what I got was when the shuttle is in flight the drain line is capped and it is the ground crew that take care of the waste water dump when the shuttle is landed.

spaceflight.nasa.gov...



[edit on 6-4-2008 by observe50]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Yanno, I included a link to this site on the article. Isn't that what it's all about...getting this information out to as many people as possible?

FYI, I also put a link to this site in my Links section. My site is one of the top 2012 sites on the net, so hopefully I can send people from my site to this one. In that case, everybody wins!


[edit on 6-4-2008 by maya12-21-2012.com]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Did they say that the tether was 81 miles away from them, and the viewpoint of the camera, if that is true, whatever those objects are they are very massive, if you use that tether as a ruler some of the them must be 6 miles or so in diameter and moving that fast, I dont know what to say, but as i said before there was a video that was taken in Jerusalem and this one in the UK
with one of those sand dollar looking objects the displayed some of the characteristics of those objects, but it was much closer to earth, not in outer space.

[edit on 6-4-2008 by phinubian]

[edit on 6-4-2008 by phinubian]



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by maya12-21-2012.com
 


Sorry for suspecting your intentions, but with such a short first post and with a link to your site I got a bad feeling about it.

Welcome to ATS
and sorry for the bad reception.



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArMaP
reply to post by maya12-21-2012.com
 


Sorry for suspecting your intentions, but with such a short first post and with a link to your site I got a bad feeling about it.

Welcome to ATS
and sorry for the bad reception.


It's all good my friend... we're on the same team!!!



posted on Apr, 6 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by observe50
 

Interesting article. Waste water dump heaters are used to make sure water does not freeze and block the pipe in space. On the ground I doubt it would be a problem.

"The waste water tank 1 drain valve controls the draining of the waste water tank during ground operations through the ground support equipment flush and drain."

If I understand this correctly, a different valve is used for draining on the ground.

Waste water dumps are sometimes mentioned in mission logs. I don't know how often they are performed.

From an interview of Chuck Shaw, Lead Flight Director for STS-75:

The 'toilet flush' you mentioned was actually a supply of waste water dump that we periodically have to do. The fuel cell and waste water are stored in tanks, and when those tanks get full they get dumped through the nozzles overboard. The water freezes as it is dumped and makes a huge cloud of 'snow'. We typically dump the retrograde to allow orbital dynamics to help dissipate the cloud away from the orbiter, but there is always a portion that stays with us since the cloud expands very rapidly in all directions when it hits a vacuum. It is not unusual to have a cloud of ice crystals around the orbiter at a variety of distances for several days after dumps. As much as I would like to think some type of UFO was around, the fact is there was not anything up there that we did not understand.
Source



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SonicInfinity
Oi oi, another repeat thread. These points have been brought up many times before.

Then again, we have a lot of new users since those topics started, so who knows. This is one of the few videos I think should be brought up constantly, not just because it is the best evidence, but because it shows how disparate debunkers are when they call them "ice particles".


Don't you mean NASA?


That's what NASA calls everything. Ice or Space Junk. Tell me how these objects are changing trajectory and slowing down, speeding up at will? IMO It doesn't take a rocket science to put the pieces together. This is only one of many documented and videotaped events by NASA itself. NASA can't discredit it's own footage. That's where they're stuck. They call it Ice because it's all they can do. They have no other options or room for deniability when this stuff occurs on live broadcast feeds. All they can do is discredit it to the best of their ability.


With the tether incident you have objects that go behind the tether that are 2-3 nautical miles in diameter? That's a big piece of ice. Please explain!!!!

-ChriS

[edit on 7-4-2008 by BlasteR]



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Starred and flagged. I was not familiar with this incident until this thread, since I'm not on the edge of my seat trolling for every UFO incident I can get my hands on. But this one is one that I have to say can't be outright dismissed through a few cursory observations. You've got me interested in this one, some neat stuff here. Thanks.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by BlasteR
 




With the tether incident you have objects that go behind the tether that are 2-3 nautical miles in diameter? That's a big piece of ice. Please explain!!!!

As i said in a previous post here, the width of the tether itself is no more than 1,5- 2.0 cm.
But as it is luminated it looks to be alot more, it's the same with the debris.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Threadfall
 

Hello Threadfall

There is a recent thread about the STS-75 mission being discussed here
Most of the things that is being discussed here has also been discussed there, and alot more, and there is alot of information in the overall on this incident there.




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 03:16 AM
link   
The camera NASA used was poorly designed. It used a large aperture lense which makes it very light sensitive, good for cloudy days on earth, but bad for highly reflective particles in the sunlight in space. It also had an image intensifier which increased it's light sensitvity. It also had other modifications done which probably ended up ruining it's visual abilities. NASA could probably only use the video for spectrograph purposes.

If you look at the tether and satelite, you will notice that you cannot distinguish the satelite. That is because the light is so diffracted by the time it reaches the camera's sensor, it does not create a proper picture. The satelite is actually 500 times larger in diameter than the tether. The tether is only .25 cm in diameter.

The reason objects pop in and out of view of the camera, is because of the field of view. It is only able to pick up objects that reflect a certain amount of light at a certain distance. If they are too close or too far, and to small to reflect enough light, the camera ignores them. Another cause would be if they moved in or out of a shadow cause by another object, such as a boom on the shuttle.



posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by finnegan
The reason objects pop in and out of view of the camera, is because of the field of view.


Everything in the camera is in the field of view. Blurry or not, its in it. No amount of blur can completely erase a lit object with a black background. You should always see a blur.


Originally posted by finnegan
It is only able to pick up objects that reflect a certain amount of light at a certain distance. If they are too close or too far, and to small to reflect enough light, the camera ignores them.


As far as I know light doesn't just stop at a certain distance, especially in a vacuum.

To small to reflect enough light?? Then how did they teleport? Did they grow? Did they instantly zoom really close to the camera and stop?

And no, a camera does not ignore it completely. Keyword completely. You will always see a blurry spot of light, the light doesn't just go away it is spread apart and concentrated when you go in and out of focus.


Originally posted by finnegan
Another cause would be if they moved in or out of a shadow cause by another object, such as a boom on the shuttle.


No such shadow exists. You can test this by watching these UFO dart across the screen, solid light the entire way. If these "shadows" you say exist were there, these UFO passing through the shadows would disapear and reveal the shadow. But they don't dispear, they are visible the entire time which would mean there is no shadows.

If you watch the video closely, you can clearly see MANY of these UFO pass across the exact area one of the other UFO teleported. If there was a shadow then how come I saw other UFO's in the same exact area?

Its because there are no shadows. It's entire field of view is lit.




posted on Apr, 7 2008 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ALLis0NE
 




As far as I know light doesn't just stop at a certain distance, especially in a vacuum.

Partly right.
It does not stop, but it could be too dim to be seen with the eye, or a camera.
Distance however can refract the light so it does not show at all.



To small to reflect enough light?? Then how did they teleport? Did they grow? Did they instantly zoom really close to the camera and stop?

Perhaps they were there all the time, and then started to reflect light after a time...



No such shadow exists. You can test this by watching these UFO dart across the screen, solid light the entire way. If these "shadows" you say exist were there, these UFO passing through the shadows would disapear and reveal the shadow. But they don't dispear, they are visible the entire time which would mean there is no shadows.

Here you asume that the camera picks up the entire shadowed part that the shuttle creates...
The camera is a very small equipment compared to the entire shuttle, and it's lens do not have the capability to show the entire shadow that the shuttle emitts.
Now this also has alot to do with the placement of the camera on the shuttle.

How a shadow looks, and which area it elongates into is decided by the sun, and from where the sun illuminates the shuttle and from which angles the suns light comes from.
It is also dependent on the movements of the shuttle...



Its because there are no shadows. It's entire field of view is lit.

That depends on how close the particles are to the camera and the shuttle, space is not 2D or 3D.







 
36
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join