Astronauts on Skylab 3 photographed GIANT UFO 1973

Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by easynow

 

But even the NASA docs identify it as a unmanned satellite.

The problem is, the term "satellite - unmanned" says nothing about the identity of this mystery object that was, according to the astronauts themselves, never identified. Heck, most people would agree that the moon is classifiable as an "unmanned satellite". That definition is designed to be entirely vague and to leave the impression that the object was positively identified, which is absolutely not the case. Judging by the evidence available (or the lack of evidence available, depending on how you want to look at it), the Skylab crew did not know what the heck it was, and they admit that it looked far different from other known man-made satellites they observed during the mission as well. The descriptions they provide related to it's appearance only support the "unidentified" conclusion as well.

Also, the ugly fact is that the document I linked above (and re-linked below for ease of reference), the SkyLab III Photographic Index and Scene Identification, actually references frames SL3-118-2138 through 2141 not once, but twice. In the first instance on page 49 that I mentioned earlier, it states that the object in all four frames is a "satellite - unmanned". However, the problem is, the second time the document references these four images (on page 259 of the same PDF), it rather explicitly declares that these four frames are "BLANK". Have a look for yourself. Again, pages 49 and 259 of the PDF are the ones in question. One page says these pics show a "satellite - unmanned", and the other says all four frames are "BLANK".
ntrs.nasa.gov...

This kind of mis-identification/mislabeling/contradictory garbage is FAR more common than most people would think in the NASA archives, and you better believe it is done purposefully in order to help steer attention away from potentially controversial images and essentially "bury" them, making them harder to find or source.

Here is what we do know about this object:
The astronauts state it was "brighter than Jupiter" and "It was reflecting in red light and oscillating at, oh, counting it's period of brightest to dimmest, about ten seconds. We know the object (again, according to the direct observations by the astronauts) did not move more than 10 or 20 degrees over the 10 minutes or so that we watched it. Its orbit was very close to that of our own.

Also, we know that the NORAD Skylab groundtrack shows the station to have been at an altitude of approximately 440kms and traveling at just over 7.5 kilometers a second during this incident time period (over Madagascar and the western edge of the Indian Ocean), and we know that astronaut Owen Garriott noted the variance in time between the object crossing the terminator into darkness and Skylab crossing the terminator to have been 5 to 6 seconds. This means that the astronaut estimations of the range to this object, they "surmised that it was not more than 30 to 50 nautical miles [35 to 58 statute miles or 56 to 93 km] from our location" certainly seems somewhat accurate.

Now, couple all that with the photographs of this object that we have, and it certainly seems that we are indeed talking about one HELL OF A BIG "satellite" here. If it was indeed somewhere around 800 feet in size (as all available evidence suggests it was), then the very idea of NASA pretending that this object can be written off and explained away by simply labeling it as "satellite-unmanned" is an insult to us all.

This object sighted during the Skylab 3 mission by all three astronauts fits the very definition of the word "unidentified". NASA and/or NORAD/DoD may have ID'd it, but they sure as heck havent told us what this HUGE object was!
Cheers!

Post Removed.
Video works fine.

Nice find!

[edit on 3-12-2008 by Odessy]

im tripping on the SKYLAB
what a piece of junk

Originally posted by NavalFC
reply to post by easynow

 

Ok..I am not understanding this, the astronauts themselves have identified it as a satellite, so why is this being doubted?

It might be interesting to note that because there was a scientist on board reference to a satellite meant a body orbiting a planet or moon as defined back then. It appears they still use it in astronomy today.

www.answers.com...

So in fact all they were saying is something appears to be orbiting the earth and we don't know what it is.

Edit: Bah you guys beat me to it lol


[edit on 3-12-2008 by Darthorious]

ok here is the best analysis of this case ever put together and thanks to Bruce Maccabee and Brad Sparks for doing this work

www.brumac.8k.com...

ANALYSIS OF THE PHOTOS OF AN UNIDENTIFIED OBJECT OBSERVED BY THE ASTRONAUTS OF SKYLAB 3

by Bruce Maccabee and Brad Sparks

this map was created to show the shadow boundry on the earth and the track of skylab 3



the object in question


according to this report Skylab did not follow the UFO into the Darkness...the UFO followed Skylab

Garriott said later that the object did not lead the Skylab into sunset, but rather followed the Skylab into sunset.

the research was exploring different possibilities of why the object appeared the way it did in the sequence of photographs and one hypothesis was the UFO could have made an advancement toward Skylab during the ten minute encounter...

whereas previously it was assumed that the object maintained a roughly fixed, large distance during the time of the first three photos and then it suddenly made an "un-satellite-like" rapid motion toward the Skylab

conclusion...

based on the available information, these authors conclude that there was no man-made satellite that could explain this sighting and hence the object was truly anomalous. Further data are being sought.

this report is an amazing study of this incident and i believe it covers all the bases imo...

www.brumac.8k.com...






[edit on 3-12-2008 by easynow]

[edit on 3-12-2008 by easynow]

wow...yeah THEY got that BIG RED THING
and we got that SKYLAB piece of junk, embarrassing

I find it mind boggling those astronauts didn't have equipment to take better pictures of something that could ba a hostile bogey during the cold war.

Does anybody else see the alien looking head in the upper right portion of the second photo?
To the right of the red " streaming" lights.
Looks like a huge spirit alien head watching over and the streams look like they would be coming from huge arms.
Now, I know its not what it looks like. But I found it interesting in a "UFO" photo there would be this image.
You might have to look for minute to find it but I saw it right away. The head part is almost like a really dark blueish with 2 black or dark spots for the eyes and well just look at it for your self.

BTW...How do I post an image. I want to outline what I see in some kind of program and post it tomorrow when I wake up. Don't feel like it now.
I know the whole " your mind sees what you want it to see " thing...... but it just caught me off guard.

I wonder how that swamp gas made it all the way out there? Maybe in a weather balloon.

Nice presentation easynow.

If this pics are authentic, maybe it has a different form? maybe like a big triangle or square?
img162.imageshack.us...

Originally posted by LunaCognita
NASA says that the recorder was not active during this period of time (16:35 GMT to 16:45 GMT on Sept 20, 1973).
The reason the tape was not recording as it was supposed to be? According to NASA's official excuse, it was because the tape had run out and had not been replaced on time. Thus, no audio of the actual event in question as it is occurring exists for us to have a listen to (and if you are willing to buy that excuse from NASA, then I have some nice oceanfront property for sale just outside of Kandahar, Afghanistan you might be interested in too!)

why don't you elabore a bit and not just lead us into thinking it is only a portion of the tape that is "missing".

Do you know for a fact that it is ONLY 16:35 GMT to 16:45 GMT?
That it never happened previously or after that event, this is the only time they "forgot" to change the tape?

If it was ONLY 16:35 GMT to 16:45 GMT then hell yea.. that's suspect.
If not, than the explaination is plausible.

This is one reason I have a hard time believing things, the information of BOTH sides is always incomplete and sometimes it is incomplete for a reason, again.. on both sides. One sides uses it to cover up and the other side uses it to make a cover up.

This is really interesting but it deservs more information and not a nod and wink confirmation.

[edit on 3-12-2008 by gormly]

Hmmm...

Trained observers, professionals, highly scientific minds....

Observed "object" for TEN minutes.....

Only 4 photographs?

How could these men restrain themselves so strongly. Did they only bring one roll of film on the trip?

I'm not saying they didn't see anything, but something about this stinks!

Any one else find this wierd?

This is the most convincing piece of ufology I have ever come across. Its information such as this that should be brought to mainstream media, instead of cow mutilations, crop circles and abductees from trailer parks.

Well done OP.

CT

Interesting read thanks for this info also nice site i find all this interesting and the photographs are great sure beats all the fakes i see daily on forums etc.. nice post

Originally posted by nerbot
Hmmm...

Trained observers, professionals, highly scientific minds....

Observed "object" for TEN minutes.....

Only 4 photographs?

How could these men restrain themselves so strongly. Did they only bring one roll of film on the trip?

I'm not saying they didn't see anything, but something about this stinks!

Any one else find this wierd?

Not at all. The object looks about the same in all those photos, it wasn't moving or doing anything special that would make it look different at other times. They were not using a fancy digital camera with unlimited capacity like most of us are used to. Four photos is a lot more than one. Besides, the availability of four photos does not mean necessarily that only four were taken.

-rrr

What I'm amazed at is the fact that this video has been around for awhile and nobody has posted it before here at ATS!

Originally posted by rickyrrr
Besides, the availability of four photos does not mean necessarily that only four were taken.
-rrr

Good point.

There was also confusion concerning the focal length of the camera in use (55mm or 300mm) as there were 5 cameras to hand. Maybe the shots we are (allowed) to look at were taken with the 55mm and the ones taken with a 300mm are the really interesting ones.

Looks to me vaguely whale like in shape..like a blue whale..aerodynamic the shape is not! Red is traditionally a WARNING COLOUR perhaps that's all it was a close flyby of the neighbors...the more we see the more we have to assume we are simply not alone and being kept ignorant..the pieces of puzzle are all over this website and the web in general..and with that it comes down to personal belief.. I KNOW FOR SURE WE ARE NOT ALONE..that is my belief and pictures like this simply confirm my own personal views

Well done easynow!

This is what the Aliens & UFO's forum is meant to be about! You have presented us with the most interesting case in quite a while now. Kudos Mate!

You've raised the bar for all those who wish to trivialize this board by posting threads like "Do Aliens Have Fun?". Anyone who wishes to post please take note of this excellent example of how it's done.

IRM