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.
Originally posted by depthoffield
You have a hard time, and low level of knowledge regarding this, so you want us to learn you the basics, to fly in space to film for you those damn particles...
Originally posted by depthoffield
How dare those little closer (a few feet or less) particles of water fog iluminated by the powerful blitz and appearing as AIRY DISCS, how dare them to show in the image with the distant buldings too? And if somewhere in the picture was the moon too, how dare them to show themselves with the 400000 kilometres away moon? How dare them?
Originally posted by Akezzon
I am not saying that these are UFO's, critters or freakin floating cheese burgers... In addition to that I am far from convinced that these are airdiscs made entirely from dust a few meters from the camera.
Originally posted by RFBurns
Well thats a nice dust attempt or is it stars now.
Try again man. When this footage came out years ago, I stood with the best of the best skeptics on the planet and not a singe one of them could validate their explanation other than ice, pannel light reflections, space debris, space junk, and I remember one even went as far as little chunks of the tether breaking away.
None could explain the pulsing rythmic patterns from their centers to the outer edges. None could explain the morphing notches. None could explain the various speeds and directions these objects, and none could explain why over a 15 second period, hords of these objects began to appear into the frame from different directions, at different speeds.
Originally posted by RFBurns
You also ignored my suggestion. Use an IR camera to do your dust test.
Originally posted by RFBurns
None could explain the pulsing rythmic patterns from their centers to the outer edges. None could explain the morphing notches. None could explain the various speeds and directions these objects, and none could explain why over a 15 second period, hords of these objects began to appear into the frame from different directions, at different speeds.
Originally posted by Akezzon
...
I am not saying that these are UFO's, critters or freakin floating cheese burgers... In addition to that I am far from convinced that these are airdiscs made entirely from dust a few meters from the camera.
I know about the effect or phenomenon, I just don't believe this is it.
But the STS-75 will prolly always be a mystery.
...
If we just consider those two objects in the image and forget the video, what do we have to judge their relative distances?
Originally posted by lernmore
As the old saying goes, "seeing is believing".
In this picture, which entity would you say is in the foreground at first glance?
Originally posted by mikesingh
Take a look at this vid. The same object as the donuts seen in the Tether incident! But this one is shot from the ground in UK...
I think that what you say is the object turning from edge-on to broadside-on is the object getting from behind some thing that was partially blocking it, but I can only test it when the night falls here in Portugal (some 6 hours away).
Check out how the object turns from edge-on to broadside-on. Some have contended that these are just lens artifacts as they conform to the lens geometrics.
Where is the "notch" in these objects? I did not saw anything like the notch on the STS-75 video.
And oh yes, check out the ubiquitous 'notch' in this object too!
There are several invisible forces (gravity, solar wind, etc.) that could be affecting that unknown object, so we can not say for sure that there is no external force affecting it.
In this case it is obvious that there is no external force that can cause the object to suddenly change its direction.
If you throw a stone into the air and someone films it going up and then down it may look like the stone is acting on its own and intelligently controlled, but that is not the case (specially if you throw the stone in a way that makes it fall on your head ).
Thus if there was no external force, then there must be some force within it to cause it to change direction. Therefore, it's either intelligent and capable of these autonomous manoeuvres or it is the result of a motive force within that's causing it do so. In other words, an intelligently controlled space craft?
Originally posted by mikesingh
Originally posted by depthoffield
Pulsing effect...
Particles of debris are perfect spheres or irregulate?
Answer: usually irregulate
Particles of debris rotate themselves or not?
Answer: many can rotate around their own axis (tumbling)
How is the rotation?
Answer: inertial, so it is regular.
Particles of debris reflect the sun light?
Answer: yes
If they are iregulate, rotates themselver regular, and reflect the light, how their brightness changes?
Answer: Brightness changes regular, because the surface reflecting light changes with rotation. In fact, the period of rotation can be easy measured from brightnes variations.
So, the regularity of their changing brightness is a FACT.
Ok, we have Airy discs, and we have regular variations in brightness. More, because the surface of the little debris particle changes periodically and regular, so the Airy disc changes regular its structure, because Airy disc is just a sum of interference and difraction of light waves passing through the lens (en.wikipedia.org...)
That's why Airy discs regularly pulsates...because the source of light varies regurlarly in brightness, size and initial phase of rays of light.
Now about spiral effect ....
What we see in is a recording from a TV or LCD screen... so the image seen is not only the airy disc, but the rows and columns of pixels too:
When the airy disc is moving along that matrix of pixels, it appears a phenomenon called MOIRE . (en.wikipedia.org...)
For an example of changing moire patterns look here: www.mathematik.com...
"And then why has DOF or some others not commented on the UFO formation photographed from the Shuttle (STS-80), earlier shown by Akezzon in his vid at page 5? "
Maybe because i have no time to respond to all of you? And allready i was accused that I post "wall of posts". If i try to explain in detail something if asked or necessary, somebody says about "posting walls of text". If not, i was asked for more explanations. What to choose? You really want to flood me?