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.

 

is this NASA video Proof that E.T.'s are trying to contact us ?

page: 13
49
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by easynow
if i have mistaken your thoughts or misjudged what you were saying then i apologize in advance



Yes, I think you did. I never intended to comment or imply anything about the possibility of a UFO passing through a cloud. No problem though... anyone can do it.




posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Yes we are talking about different objects
you mean that faint blur that moves quite quick. I was talking about that white dot a bit to the right and ahead of the darker object sorry for the confusion.

To C.H.U.D.




I'm sorry, I don't have time to look for your links now, but if you would like to post them here along with the times at which the event appear, then I'll take a gander...


Here is the videos we are talking about they were also linked too in the first post of mine you replied too.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

To get a good idea of the 'clouds' i am refering too you will need to watch the last minute of the first video (It's only 2mins long anyway so maybe just watch the whole thing). And take note of the object highlighted in red that enters from the bottom at about 1min. This is the object me and easynow are talking about. The second video is only about 20 second long and shows a zoom in of the red object going through the 'cloud'.



That's right... but it's a long way off, and as I said before you can see where the clouds are on Earth. What do you not understand about this?


Just wait they you can see the clouds. What are we arguing about then? The fact there are clouds and the object doesn't go through them or there are no clouds around that object? Because before you were saying that they couldn't possibly be clouds because its space (reasons 1 through 5 lol) now you can see clouds?

[edit on 3-11-2008 by Steve B]



posted on Nov, 3 2008 @ 09:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Steve B
 


ok i see what your talking about now


it's questionable if that's part of the earth or something in the atmosphere, it does seem to go at the same speed as the rotation of the planet but it sure does look like the other objects also.

to CHUD,

the conversation about clouds had me in the clouds
i guess but i thought the conversation was about clouds in that part of the atmosphere and it seemed relevant to bring up the UFO going thru the clouds even though you didn't mention it

but i guess i have been watching to many SPACE CRITTERS tonight
:



posted on Nov, 4 2008 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Steve B
Just wait they you can see the clouds. What are we arguing about then?


I'm not sure - I was just trying to explain the reason for the "clouds", then you guys jumped on me!



Originally posted by Steve B
The fact there are clouds and the object doesn't go through them or there are no clouds around that object? Because before you were saying that they couldn't possibly be clouds because its space (reasons 1 through 5 lol) now you can see clouds?


Well, when I first referred to the "clouds" I was talking about the tether footage specifically. With the tether footage you can see that most of the objects pass in front of the tether, right? So they must be roughly the same distance away as the tether, right? We know the tether is only a few miles away, and we know the shuttle is about 400km altitude. So, knowing the height at which clouds form, we can say it's by all intents and purposes impossible for clouds to be anywhere near by the tether.

With other parts of the NASA footage, it's impossible to tell, since we have no referance points like the tether.


Just to clarify about the space thing... technically there is no hard boundary between the upper atmosphere and space... the atmosphere just becomes progressively thinner as you climb higher. So, in a way, the shuttle is actually orbiting within the atmosphere if you really want to be pedantic about it... however, you still need a space suit to live outside the shuttle, no clouds can form up there, etc... for all intents and purposes, that is space.

As for the "clouds" in the first video... yes, can see real clouds in Earth's lower atmosphere... but, once again, they are a long way away. What you are perceiving as a drop in contrast, is due to excess light causing flare - I think that's got to be what you're mistaking for clouds. It's only on the left hand side yeah? Pretty obvious that that is what it is since during that footage you can see the shuttle cross the "terminator", with day on the left and night on the right.

Anyway, that's me done on this subject - I don't have the time or inclination to argue any more about this, but hopefully you have understood what I was trying to say. Until next time...



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Although I find those STS videos to be quite compelling I can't say the same about Sereda's theory.

It's a very interesting agglomerate of words and schematics, but too far fetched.
Being as it is, the theory is based on the supposed design of an alleged spacecraft. For a start, without the certainty that those are indeed alien space ships he shouldn't go as far as trying to explain the logic behind spacetravel in those therms.
I give him A grade for the effort nevertheless.

Remember Descartes? You can't start a house by its roof, and I believe this applies to Sereda.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 09:56 PM
link   
As much as I hope I'm wrong, as "crazy" as it sounds, I vigorously maintain the Prime Directive (or whatever it's actually called) is real. That's why the nonhumans' STS-80 display was at a good distance and nothing too overt. The good-or-better beings are simply waiting, for as long as they in good conscience can, for enough Earth people to be against secrecy-based government(s) in general before anything truly spectacular happens, though I personally hope they show up, like, yesterday (election day).



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by _Phoenix_
 



I think that video was debunked on ufo hunters. The one on the history channel.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Quite possibly, space critters or space dwelling organisms (SDO's) are a form of life that does not fit into the scientific paradigm that has been taught so far, and like most (if not ALL) things that patently challenge the 'status quo', are simply ignored, covered up, or outright debunked.

Take the 'RODS' as another example of, what i think is not alien life, but earthly life that challenges the accepted biological paradigm, and so is ignored etc. NOT only that, but these 'rods and critters', display abilities and capabilities that are not only spectacular and suprising, but would cause us to have to re-examine what we think we know about physics AND biology.

These things show intelligence, especially the space critter type. The rods, appear to travel at an extreme rate of speed.

'They' do not like us knowing things that can awaken us to new possibilities, for obvious reasons.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 05:24 AM
link   
reply to post by _Phoenix_
 


There are actually extremophiles that are able to survive in space, essentially I believe that is what life on earth evolved from. It's very possible that there are some entities out there that have evolved from these extremophiles and exist in isolated parts of space and feed on sunlight and other galactic resources. Maybe they feed on electric fields that surround planets, which may be why we see so many of these things crowding around that tether which surely caused a MASSIVE electric field. The size of them kinda bring the idea to a halt for most, but keep in mind in space there is much less gravity and no or very little air pressure so any entity able to survive in space would be able to reach monolithic proportions.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by spikey
reply to post by easynow
 


Quite possibly, space critters or space dwelling organisms (SDO's) are a form of life that does not fit into the scientific paradigm that has been taught so far, and like most (if not ALL) things that patently challenge the 'status quo', are simply ignored, covered up, or outright debunked.

Take the 'RODS' as another example of, what i think is not alien life, but earthly life that challenges the accepted biological paradigm, and so is ignored etc. NOT only that, but these 'rods and critters', display abilities and capabilities that are not only spectacular and suprising, but would cause us to have to re-examine what we think we know about physics AND biology.

These things show intelligence, especially the space critter type. The rods, appear to travel at an extreme rate of speed.

'They' do not like us knowing things that can awaken us to new possibilities, for obvious reasons.



I totally agree, the reason being that it would make us question everything we've been taught. Its just not 'life' as we know it...



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 08:41 AM
link   
The pattern and formation suggests intelligience and an attempt to communicate.. I agree with the OP on this completely. I cannot say that I can guess what the objects are or where they come from but they are most definately intelligient and trying to make their presence known.
Incidently Martin Stubbs is a member here. He is our "secret nasa man"


I am most grateful to him for bringing these things to light in the first place.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by NephraTari
 


thanks NephraTari



Incidently Martin Stubbs is a member here. He is our "secret nasa man"

I am most grateful to him for bringing these things to light in the first place.


cool i didn't know he was a member here on ATS

and i am also thankful for him bringing these video's to our attention. just makes you wonder what we have been missing out on all this time ?



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Slighty off topic... All the vids was removed from YouTube. I cannot see it. Which does kinda SUCK!!



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by bskivss3
 


the video in the Op is working fine


try it again

es.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   
Does anyone know the status of the movie 1 anunnaki ?
Is it ever coming out ?



posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
Haven't there been some detailed refutations of the 'UFO interpretation' of these videos posted privately on the Internet? Has anybody looked for them, linked to them, and refuted them? Just for context and background...

If you have, plz share the links.

Dobie-1944



posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 09:46 PM
link   
I really love this website and all of you that inhabit it, but I have to say that most of you are not a very scientific bunch. The frequenters of this site routinely post images or videos of the most extraordinary occurances and the vast majority of you then make a most unscientific and illogical leap of faith and declare the posted file to be "proof" that UFO's or ghosts or the NWO and so on have been proven beyond a doubt. I understand that this website's main function is to provide belief reinforcement in all of these rather extreme conclusions but, as a true skeptic, I feel that I really have to point out that, in this case, what you are seeing in these videos is something completely unprecedented and, so far, unexplained. Based upon the visual evidence I would have to say that no definitive conclusion as to their true nature can be drawn.

On the other hand, you folks are more than willing to rush to the conclusion that what you have witnessed is incontrivertable proof of extraterrestrial activity above the Earth. Folks, I hate to break it to you but the sad fact is that, up to now, there is still no compelling evidence that life exists beyond our world. I will whole-heartedly agree that logic would seem to dictate that if life exists here then it must exist elsewhere but, honestly, until an extraterrestrial organism can be found and verified, that idea is still just a baseless supposition. The logical conclusion, based upon available evidence, is that this phenomena is entirely natural and not the work of pan-dimensional beings who have somehow managed to traverse the vastness of the cosmos in some unimagineable fashion just to send us coded messages we cannot possibly understand.

The people who inhabit this site seem to like to talk scientific jargon, but emperical logic seems to be decidely absent in may of the posts. All too frequently you guys provide the conclusion at the outset and then back it up with only the most cursory and debateable of evidence, a.k.a. videos like these. Hell, I'm looking for answers too, just like you. I wouldn't even waste my time on this site if i weren't. But too many of you are way too willing to accept any evidence as conclusive proof without even a passing attempt at considering the possibility of a fraud or a fake or, dare I say it, the potential that there are natural phenomena that are still undiscovered and not yet explained?

Like Muldaur, you want to believe, but you shouldn't let that desire override your common sense. None of these videos are conclusive proof of anything more than that desire to believe. Strange lights moving weirdly in a highly magnetic stratosphere would seem to me to fall into the realm of unexplained natural phenomena more readily than into the realm of UFO activity. Sorry to throw water on the fantasy parade but moving lights in the sky do not equal intelligent extraterrestrials to a skeptical and empirical mind. I admire your faith and your purpose but the stuff I find on this website does not convince me that aliens either exist or are trying diligently to contact us. It would be great if that were true but, so far, all we have is lights in the sky and the faith of folks like yourselves to prove this fantastic notion.



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS

Haven't there been some detailed refutations of the 'UFO interpretation' of these videos posted privately on the Internet? Has anybody looked for them, linked to them, and refuted them? Just for context and background...

If you have, plz share the links.

Dobie-1944


James Oberg has made a statement about this video and has stated that they are ice crystals being illuminated by the sun.

that's all fine and dandy but he never explains how these 'ice crystals' magically can appear in a circle formation. yes it is possible that ice crystals could do this but what are the odds of that happening the way it did ?

there are also other strange things about this video such as objects coming into the view and seem to have come from a lower altitude than ice crystals falling of the shuttle would be. so for me to just accept Mr. Obergs explanation when there are other unanswered questions about this video would be ignorant.

here is a link if you want to read his report

www.hyper.net...



posted on Nov, 8 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 



I have to say that most of you are not a very scientific bunch.


so since science has no explanation for this phenomena we are supposed to be scientific about it ?
remember the world was flat at one time


I feel that I really have to point out that, in this case, what you are seeing in these videos is something completely unprecedented and, so far, unexplained. Based upon the visual evidence I would have to say that no definitive conclusion as to their true nature can be drawn.


perception is reality my friend and if you perceive things differently than others that makes you right and others wrong about their own personal conclusions ? many people here like myself have had experiences that factor into our decision's or conclusions. can you say the same ?


On the other hand, you folks are more than willing to rush to the conclusion that what you have witnessed is incontrivertable proof of extraterrestrial activity above the Earth.


you can't prove it isn't E.T. activity and once again past experiences play a factor in some peoples conclusions.


I hate to break it to you but the sad fact is that, up to now, there is still no compelling evidence that life exists beyond our world.


as far as you know


just because your eye's have not laid on the proof does not mean it does not exist.


The logical conclusion, based upon available evidence, is that this phenomena is entirely natural


wow talk about jumping to conclusions, i hate to tell you this but we don't have all the evidence yet.


The people who inhabit this site seem to like to talk scientific jargon, but emperical logic seems to be decidely absent in may of the posts.


news flash...there is nothing logical about this phenomena


But too many of you are way too willing to accept any evidence as conclusive proof without even a passing attempt at considering the possibility of a fraud or a fake or, dare I say it, the potential that there are natural phenomena that are still undiscovered and not yet explained?


wrong wrong and wrong


Strange lights moving weirdly in a highly magnetic stratosphere would seem to me to fall into the realm of unexplained natural phenomena more readily than into the realm of UFO activity.


odds are about the same for me



Sorry to throw water on the fantasy parade but moving lights in the sky do not equal intelligent extraterrestrials


and you can prove this how ? by logic ? once again i will remind you that we don't know what is going on and to make the leap that it isn't something Alien is equally ignorant imo.


so far, all we have is lights in the sky and the faith of folks like yourselves to prove this fantastic notion.


once again your perception of things, and there is a huge amount of evidence that shows E.T.'s are visiting this planet but i won't name it all because you will probably just use your own perception of logic to dismiss it.





[edit on 8-11-2008 by easynow]



posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   
easynow: "James Oberg has made a statement about this video and has stated that they are ice crystals being illuminated by the sun. "

Thanks for the link -- I couldn't find any claim in it that the objects were ice crystals. Did I miss something?

It seems the essay, if it checks out, does explain features you don't think are explained, such as objects appearing out of nowhere.

Is it also true, as the essay claims, that no crewmember has ever claimed to have seen the objects -- they were only on a video downkick?

That essay is more than ten years old -- why has it never been refuted?

dobie-1944




top topics



 
49
<< 10  11  12    14 >>

log in

join