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: 8
49
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix

No they arent. Lens flares dont pass behind objects.


I'm not talking about the objects. Lens flare is an overall drop in contrast - ie where the picture becomes lighter.

Perhaps you should actually find out about something in future before commenting and making yourself look stupid?

Just a suggestion...




posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Darthorious

Doubt it when they re-created the effect to perfection everyone but the scientist they have employed was pretty let down by it. I'm sure the video's on youtube. It pretty much takes the 99% real 1% chance it's lens flare and flips the table the other way.


Lens flares dont move behind objects. I havent seen it on youtube, maybe you could point it out, that should be a chuckle for everyone?

I think the "debunk" has about 1% of being real and 99% chance of being a deliberate scam designed to debunk something thats very interesting


Thats certainly wouldnt be a rare phenomenon, would it?



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.H.U.D.

Originally posted by silver6ix

No they arent. Lens flares dont pass behind objects.


I'm not talking about the objects. Lens flare is an overall drop in contrast - ie where the picture becomes lighter.

Perhaps you should actually find out about something in future before commenting and making yourself look stupid?

Just a suggestion...


I know what a lens flare is and I do know that it whats on the film isnt lens flares, as im sure most smart people could. Im afraid you will need to try something much better, not everyone is as dumb as you seem to image


Lets have more fun, why dont you prove your lens flare solution? I mean these clever dubunks surely come with some clever support dont they?


[edit on 2-11-2008 by silver6ix]



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darthorious

Originally posted by silver6ix
reply to post by Darthorious
 


Actually its been :claimed to be debunked.

Smart people might tell you lens flares really dont behave anything like that especially since theres more than one moving in very specific directions, although im fairly sure someone would love for the "debunk" to stick


Bottom line, careful who you trust, like Mulder said, trust noone. People have a brain and my best advice to anyone would be to use it, make you own mind up on EVERYTHING. Truth in the modern age is transcient and deceptive. Someone tells you they are telling the truth, you can be pretty sure they might be lying.


Doubt it when they re-created the effect to perfection everyone but the scientist they have employed was pretty let down by it. I'm sure the video's on youtube. It pretty much takes the 99% real 1% chance it's lens flare and flips the table the other way.


Here's the video's links




Here's direct links to the 2 video's

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by snowen20
 


another disinfo saying - grow up or is saying that to hard for mind controlled ats!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
none of you are where you need to be to defeat whats comming it shows by the lack of depth here and every where



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   
I really like the footage in those video clips! Wonderful and fascinating stuff to watch. But after looking at them I find myself very concerned. If we believe what NASA says about all of that "stuff" being debris, then for crying out loud why don't they learn how to keep that crap under control! It looks like a frigging landfill up there! I mean, damn, do they just empty their trash bin when they're ready to head back to Earth? Sheesh!

I personally think that at least some of the objects are not debris. The video of the circle forming goes very far in showing that something unusual is influencing the objects. Whether or not that influence is from humans, aliens, or some other force can only be speculated. But debris sure as heck doesn't form a circle that way, and unless they're tossing out materials that give off energy, I can't accept the idea that space junk can just light up AFTER moving into a peculiar formation.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darthorious
Here's the video's links




Here's direct links to the 2 video's

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...


Well, theres an interesting thing. You see the first clip debunks NASA and the first clip debunks the "explanation" for the tether clip, and none of the explanations cover the original clip in the thread



So what we have in the first 4 minutes of the first clip is the point that ice particles and space debris are not possible because they pause and change velocity.

However the second clip then claims (using very suspect methods) that the tether is caused only by lens flares on ice particles, however the first clip already debunked that since we know ice particles would be slowing down and changing velocity at any point for now reason.......oooops.

This is what you would call a classic example of the enforced debunk.

However, none of them hav debunked the original formation flying ice particles yet. Any takers?



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by easynow
 


Just wanted to add:

That is how ET craft would appear coming from higher dimensions, they would show up as light objects, translucent looking to our physical eyes then materialize.

If you could look up into the sky and see all around you in the next dimension you would be amazed at what's there.

People would faint or have a heart attack probably.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
You know the funniest thing about some of these post event debunks.....NASA themselves didnt know how to debunk it


So with all their space scientists, all their off worldly wisdom, they didnt know the effects of space junk and lens flares? I find that a little hard to believe, I mean the National Aerospace Security Agency is the knower of all things and provider of all wisdom after all.


They say space has a smell.....id concur with that when NaSA are involed for sure, care to guess what it smells like?


[edit on 2-11-2008 by silver6ix]



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:25 PM
link   
Also should be considered: man-made objects. Perhaps that's part of our missle defense system? Who knows. It could be neither ice particles nor aliens.

But it is suspiciously "round-ish", and the objects almost very evenly spaced, I think it's at least worth investigation. I don't think you can say it's debris out of hand (any more than you can say it's alien technology).

Finally, if it is alien, there is no way to know they are trying to communicate. I think if they wanted to communicate with us, they would have no problem doing so whatsoever.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix

Originally posted by Darthorious
Here's the video's links




Here's direct links to the 2 video's

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...


Well, theres an interesting thing. You see the first clip debunks NASA and the first clip debunks the "explanation" for the tether clip, and none of the explanations cover the original clip in the thread



So what we have in the first 4 minutes of the first clip is the point that ice particles and space debris are not possible because they pause and change velocity.

However the second clip then claims (using very suspect methods) that the tether is caused only by lens flares on ice particles, however the first clip already debunked that since we know ice particles would be slowing down and changing velocity at any point for now reason.......oooops.

This is what you would call a classic example of the enforced debunk.

However, none of them hav debunked the original formation flying ice particles yet. Any takers?


Ah ya that's what I said in my first post the teather can be debunked that's it.

Edit the lens flare is not caused by the ice particles watch the video again.


[edit on 2-11-2008 by Darthorious]



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver6ix
I know what a lens flare is and I do know that it whats on the film isnt lens flares, as im sure most smart people could. Im afraid you will need to try something much better, not everyone is as dumb as you seem to image


Lets have more fun, why dont you prove your lens flare solution? I mean these clever dubunks surely come with some clever support dont they?



I'm not trying to debunk anything here.

It's pretty obvious you don't have a clue about what you are talking about... if anything, you are demonstaraiting your own ignorace here.

There are different types of lens flare:



Flare takes two forms. The first is best described as "non-image forming light" that affects the photograph. We all know what this does. It degrades the contrast of the image by increasing the exposure without adding any image content. Every photographer knows that the way to avoid it is to shield the front of the lens from the sun (when doing outdoor work) or from any artificial light appearing directly in the shot when working indoors.

The second type of flare is caused when non-image forming light enters the lens in such a way as to reflect off the internal surfaces of the lens, causing the elements themselves to become part of the image. The photograph below is a wonderful example of this. In fact, without the flare it would have been ho-hum at best. With it, it's quite an eye catcher.


www.luminous-landscape.com...


When a bright light source is shining on the lens but not in its field of view, lens flare appears as a haze that washes out the image and reduces contrast. This can be avoided by shading the lens (the purpose for which lens hoods are designed).

source


Veiling glare is stray light in lenses and optical systems caused by reflections between surfaces of lens elements and the inside barrel of the lens. It is a strong predictor of lens flare— image fogging (loss of shadow detail and color) as well as "ghost" images— that can degrade image quality in the presence of bright light sources in or near the field of view. It occurs in every optical system, including the human eye.

source

Feeling stupid now? well, you should be



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Why would they want to communicate directly with Joe Public? I mean JP walks around with their eyes closed so until they open those eyes theres not really a point, so the question would be how to open those eyes more than anything else.

My own feeling would be, say in theory, that they might be simply reminding certain ne'erdowells of the facts of life which maybe they have managed to get slightly delusional about.


Maybe a little message to the underlings that the ship they are riding is heading for a crunch and they would be better jumping off and sinking it behind them before they become collateral in the penultimate manouvers



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


Well that was great, but I seem to have missed the point of it, somehow it just doesnt seem relevant to anything except telling people what they already know.

Maybe you should send that along to NaSA though because it seems your buddies didnt know much about their own camera and its effects, they needed a "debunker" to create the explanation for the tether.

Anyway, you still havent told us about who trained the ice particles in the original clip to formation flying, is this some new super secret weapon? Formations of debris trained to swarm the world? Sounds interesting.

Come on, lets stay with the point here, you are starting to sound like a cult leader



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
What alot of you simply are choosing not to understand is that these objects may well be an undiscovered form of life in our galaxy, and they do not communicate with us for the same reason amoeba and plankton don't communicate with us... they simply don't posses the ability to communicate anything to anyone.

Some of you point to occoms razor to explain away these objects as debris or ice, but that theory can be adapted to explain the differences between advanced alien civilizations buzzing around in massive spacecraft and simple unintelligent organisms with no description or genus.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Retikx
What alot of you simply are choosing not to understand is that these objects may well be an undiscovered form of life in our galaxy, and they do not communicate with us for the same reason amoeba and plankton don't communicate with us... they simply don't posses the ability to communicate anything to anyone.

Some of you point to occoms razor to explain away these objects as debris or ice, but that theory can be adapted to explain the differences between advanced alien civilizations buzzing around in massive spacecraft and simple unintelligent organisms with no description or genus.


The issue is that if you go to a de-bunker (which I'm not normally) or skeptic this is what will be presented to the individual presenting this material.

Thus in an effort to push for a forced disclosure of goverments better evidence would have to be presented that can't be this easily explained away whether this is actually anything or not.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Steve B
reply to post by secretnasaman
 


Hi secretnasaman long time no see.

If these videos are released before Christmas it will be a great holiday surprise. I know alot of people want to see all the videos.
And hello my friend! I couldn't resist posting, and yet it is as if no one is listening as in commenting- so it is a strange discussion between 2 or 3 others,
who are doing OK, but this is world wide! Always interested in your comments steve B.. I am for real on the
"archive' giveaway at Xmas, and you will get a heads up to boot!

AND now back to the this thread..and Steve B, this will include lots of the "not seen

"second Space Phenomena, that are invisible unless you can slow the images down- this is really NEW and will change the Debate 100%. I have always wondered why Sereda and the UK bunch and, well everyone that has some-yet, none has not
posted! Before Jeff Challender died, he and I were deeply studying this "strange phenomena" as he called it . To me it's the "Stubbs Streak!..stay tuned..



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikesingh
I had posted this earlier with a video grab of that intriguing formation here...
Were Aliens Sending A Message To The Space Shuttle?

Here's that image:



Note the almost perfect circle the objects form with the 'boss' in the middle! Intelligent ice particles? Dust in space? Stars? White holes? Camera glitches? Reflection? ........ Or just plain UFOs?

Cheers!


Skeptics. Just stop what your doing for the moment, sit back, hold your comments and look. Look at this for a few minutes and don't say a thing. Take a deep breath and look at it some more.

Now for the hard part. Be honest with yourself.

Thanks Mikesingh.



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by C.H.U.D.
 


ok thanks for the info you posted and according to what that info say's and what your implying is that the appearance of the tether critters is not the actual shape of them due to the possibility of lens flare of the camera ?



i will admit that is a possibility but of course IF that's true then what is the true appearance of these anomalous objects ? maybe it would be far more revealing if it were the case ?

here is a ufo spotted by Apollo 14 on the Moon


credit goes to internos for the animation gif


also if these are biological creatures maybe the lense flare only covered up the objects partially ?



www.rense.com...



posted on Nov, 2 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by FlySolo
 


Its not their role to be honest, theirs is to sow the seeds of confusion.


Dont listen to me, dont listen to them, DONT listen to NaSA, just look for yourseleves, think for yourselves and see the world.

Im pretty sure that simple philosophy is a very powerful thing.



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join