It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


‘Alien Donuts’ In Space! Too Much Of A Coincidence To Be Debunked?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 07:52 AM
As all science students know, space is a dichotomy with regards to its temperature. Space is cold but as soon as any gas, liquid or solid object is exposed to bare space, the intense radiation from the sun quickly causes heat to be formed and very fast nuclear and chemical reactions take place.

The question about the alleged "ice crystals" is that we know that small pieces of ice (even a few meters in diameter) could not survive the intense radiation from the sun and stars in space for very long. In fact, what we were told by the astronauts on these missions was that the alleged ice crystals we see "follow them around, from time to time". Wrong because ice dissolves very quickly, yet these ice crystals do not !

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:13 AM
There are several segments on the NASA video where we can see enormous bodies of ice floating by, many of which appear to be larger than the entire water tanks on the shuttle. And there are a lot more than four of these enormous (alleged) ice crystals on space shuttle missions on the many videos Martyn Stubbs recorded. In one scene, which is a fly-a-round by the shuttle of the Mir space station, there are over a hundred of these large objects!

Some of them seem to be enormous chunks of ice, perhaps five to ten feet in diameter or even much greater (depending on distance from the camera). It would be cause of alarm to suggest that these are possible "small comets" because of what devastation they would cause upon inevitable impact with the Earth. There is no greater mystery to me as to what these objects may be.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:44 AM
The STS-75 tether was essentially a large conductor cable utilizing the natural electricity as it passed through the charged ionosphere above the earth. The natural electricity in the ionosphere was acting upon the tether and flowing through it to give extra energy to the shuttle or future space stations. It was a great idea and experiment.

The experiment did not go as planned. The tether produced far more electricity than scientists and engineers had previously calculated. After the tether broke, NASA held a press conference and announced that all video was under embargo for the investigation to come, and they were talking about all the rest of the videos that were taken, but not downloaded yet.

All videos other than the Stubbs tether video he alone recorded live, are classified and have never been seen again. If NASA wants to show that they are right about ice and dust bunnies, then why not release the many other videos they classified, and all this would end. (or would they also show what the Stubbs video shows?)

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 09:50 AM
On the shuttle Columbia, NASA had installed a special camera just to observe the tether and look for an anomalies the process created. This was called TOP, for tether optical phenomena experiment.

The heart of the TOP instrument is a hand-held, low light video camera with special filters and exposures, all controlled by a team of scientists on earth sending commands
and viewing live video images. The primary purpose was to observe luminescence produced by electron beams and any interaction of the electrically charged satellite with the local charged-particle and neutral atmosphere.

NASA has all kinds of video cameras on shuttle flights, and in the analogue era, most of the video was put on videotape and not seen by scientists until the shuttle returned to earth. Thus we saw whatever NASA chose to download live along with ground control.

NASA cameras peer into the invisible ultraviolet light spectrum, because that is the spectrum of light where high-energy UFOs should be vibrating, in theory. It is also the spectrum where NASA has said that the observed "SOMETHING" was spotted.

The TOP camera was capable of seeing into the infrared spectrum, the ultraviolet spectrum, the X-ray spectrum and even the gamma ray spectrum! NASA had also asked contractors to retrofit video cameras into "Image Intensified CCD Cameras" that were more sensitive to high frequencies of light.

NASA also used specially manufactured photodiodes which offer sufficient video gain, low background noise, and other numerous applications! These bring the same other qualities as low light CCD cameras, and they span the near ultraviolet, visible and near infrared spectra of light and are sensitive to charged particles and ionizing radiation. (they also detect x-rays and gamma rays)...all compliments of Advanced Photonix in Camarillo, California.

This is amazing evidence that all the NASA video cameras used inside and outside the shuttle were not ordinary camcorders. The images of the tether and satellite we see are truly advanced images peering into the invisible spectrum of light energy.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Akezzon
And some will say, hey it's particles burning up in the atmosphere.
Ok, it might be...But shouldn't they be moving. These comes to a stop and hover in a formation. This is also interesting. I don't automatically believe it is ALIENS AMAGAAD!!! but I sure start to wonder.

Wow excellent video. Look at the formation. Look at the way they appear.

Those are some huge pulsating particles.

Care to debunk Phage?


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 10:45 AM
reply to post by MoonMine

Have you read this thread?

I think Phage answered the pulsating question rather well, and people have explained the optics of this, including an excellent UFO Hunters experiment, further experiments from Depth of Field. You know what Phage got for his effort? An accusation of being a paid disinformation agent. Nice.

Defocussed objects like the ufos are something most photographers who've spent any amount of time learning about optics are aware of. Indeed often you can glean a fair bit about the optics of the camera from the distinctive Bokeh of cameras. Sometimes it is possible to count the edges and work out how many leafs the aperture has - other times they produce distinctive mirror + notch shapes. All are indicative of lens properties not unknown phenomena.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by jackphotohobby]

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:13 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:25 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:31 AM
Alright already. Quit the personal stuff and focus on the issue here.

well, Phage said it was rotating stuff that made the pulsating effect.

But just saying it doesn't really prove it even if that is one logical explanation. Again...Logical explanations shouldn't automatically be assumed to be the right explanation.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by Akezzon]

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by Akezzon

I agree absolutely - I just resented the implication that us sceptics (or at least sceptics in this specific case) hadn't provided a counter argument. Ultimately it is up to people to make up their own mind as individuals and I think the only people to change minds are the individuals themselves. So I don't begrudge anyone (outside of being called a shill - which is pretty disgusting).

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 11:49 AM
Just a reminder...

Going forward, please focus responses on the Actual topic of discussion and Not on a fellow member's character or person.

Thank You.

» Aliens & UFOs » ‘Alien Donuts’ In Space! Too Much Of A Coincidence To Be Debunked? » Post Reply

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:19 PM
I believe as whole heartedly as anyone else that craft are flying around inside and outside of our atmosphere. I've spent countless hours viewing the never ending flow of footage showing these odd craft which tease our imaginations. Even though I believe at least half of the objects filmed may indead be nonconventional craft, for me to give a peice of footage special consideration it must pass certain criteria.

One of the main things I like to see is a control point or reference point in frame(i.e. something stationary or constant in the background).

The second is extraordinary or erratic movement(which means nothing without the control point).

The third is clarity, obviously seeing the actual shape of an object is better than a fussy round dot.

The fourth is footage which has been shot free hand without a mount, this is because of the difficulty using CGI to insert a moving object into a shaking backround while maintaining the correct relativity between the object in motion and the backround. It can be done, but in my opinion, not convincingly.

Having said that, the tether footage, though it is probably extraordinary craft, the appearance of the objects is too easily explained by camera focus. Again let me say I believe the objects or atleast some of them to be the genuine artifact(E.T., E.D., T.T., etc.), but their apparent shape on the footage is created by the focusing in the camera. This explains why most of the craft filmed in space end up looking the same as if they're posing for the shot by flattening out perpendicular to the perspective of the camera every time.

Basically, I feel in order to legitimize the field we have to be extremely rigoruos in filtering out evidence which can be explained. So that these nutballs(Shostak, Tarter, McGahee, Shermer, etc.) have to look at the incontrovertible evidence.

This is one of my favorite vid's shot in space.

If the embed doesn't work here's the title of the YouTube Vid "UFO - NASA STS-114 Below Earth". I can't see how this can be anything but a controlled object or if not it could be that it's normal space debris being acted upon by the gravity of an invisible craft parked in earth orbit. Anyway, that's how I see it, take it or leave it.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:30 PM
Hey Buddy420

Have never seen that video before.
Amazing one.

High speed to complete stop, and then continue moving but in the opposit direction. That is one heck of a particle aye?

And I strongly doubt it is a movement of the shuttle since nothing else are moving...

Great find.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:09 PM
Look at the trajectory of this objects from the sts 75 mission. It does an almost 180° turn:

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:16 PM
Secret Space - Astronauts Report UFOs

Bogey at 10 O'clock high

Also check out 4:45 minutes and 6:20 minutes of video above

and check this video out at 3:07 minutes

What was waiting for us at the moon? Pay Close attention

transmissions from Armstrong to Control.

Documents like this and the artifacts filmed around the broken tether...

Is more proof really needed to convince us there are UFO's and/or ET's?

I weigh an astronaut reporting first hand info about encounters experienced while in space.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:39 PM

Originally posted by Akezzon
here is another nice video containing the same transparent, blurry effect ( in the beginning of the movie )

And some will say, hey it's particles burning up in the atmosphere.
Ok, it might be...But shouldn't they be moving. These comes to a stop and hover in a formation. This is also interesting. I don't automatically believe it is ALIENS AMAGAAD!!! but I sure start to wonder.

As I have said in several threads about this subject, I don't think that this video shows the same things as the STS-75 video, to me, the STS-75 objects are really small objects closer to the camera (it does not mean that they must be close to the camera, just closer than the tether), maybe ice crystals or some other small particles, while the STS-80 video shows what looks like large plasma "bubbles" being attracted to the upper atmosphere but not being able to enter and becoming "squashed" against it by the force that pull them to that place.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:49 PM

Originally posted by secretnasaman
Then the tether breaks and it happens when there is a "loss of signal," during a satellite switchover. Meanwhile the astronauts get the video "on tape" and download it asap for NASA scientists to study. The only trouble was that 'ground control' had not seen the video before and so everyone on Earth saw the UNEDITED download! They never thought UFOs would be swarming the satellite and tether and once the video download was sent out live, it could not be stopped!
If I remember it correctly, this famous STS-75 video was filmed some time after the breaking of the tether, it was not on the same day.

The video of the tether breaking was available on a NASA site, but it disappeared after a remodelling of the site, but I already had it on my computer, so here it is.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:53 PM

Originally posted by mikesingh
Well, good point there! However, I would like to mention those donuts in space were photographed in UV light and not in the visual spectrum.
I have tried to find reliable information about the camera's capabilities, can you please tell me if you have any information about that?


posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:26 PM
All cameras on the shuttles have all the bells and whistles a billion dollar flight can afford (see earlier post) the embargoed video of the tether incident will be showing high quality images, with every spectrum.Yet NASA will not release it? Why? The only reason could be that it does NOT debunk the UFO swarm! Why the censorship? Jim Oberg said that even he could not access the NASA flight video showing any of the tether material. The TOP camera shoud give us the answer once and for all. So NASA-

ATS challenges you to show us your footage, rather than your paperwork.

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:39 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP
I have tried to find reliable information about the camera's capabilities, can you please tell me if you have any information about that?

I am not sure if you consider David Sereda a reliable source, but here he quotes from a letter he received from a NASA scientist:

With regards to NASA's video cameras peering into the invisible? NASA knows all this and they have video cameras aboard the Space Shuttles and aboard satellites that can see into invisible spectra of light, such as the infrared and the near ultraviolet. I confirmed the wavelengths of the shuttles video cameras with NASA scientists back in 1998, Dr. Joseph Nuth, III, Head of Astrochemistry at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, MD. He said that the shuttle’s video cameras could see near UV photons in a letter to me dated April 3, 2000: “Although the camera itself may respond to x-rays and gamma rays (usually as noise), the optics do not serve to focus on anything but visible and near-UV photons. I would be amazed if the optics were not quartz so that the UV cut-off wavelength would be ~ 180 nm. If sapphire the cut-off drops to 160 nm and for CaF2 the cut-off is ~ 135 nm.” UV is divided into near, far and extreme. The near UV is higher in wavelengths frequency than the color violet. It is also invisible to the human eye and spans almost as wide as the visible light spectrum in wavelengths. Many of NASAs video cameras see well into the invisible Infra-red also. Infrared is lower in wavelength frequency than the color red. Infrared is even easier than UV detection.

By definition, what Dr. Nuth is saying that the video cameras can see not only Near UV wavelengths of invisible light, but also Far UV defined here: Ultraviolet (UV) light is electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength shorter than that of visible light, but longer than soft X-rays. It can be subdivided into near UV (380–200 nm wavelength), far or vacuum UV (200–10 nm; abbrev. FUV or VUV), and extreme UV (1–31 nm; abbrev. EUV or XUV). It appears he made a mistake 135 - 180 Nano-meters is into the Far UV, even deeper into this invisible spectra than previously thought.

I have confirmed by letter that the above letter from NASA is true and documented.

top topics

<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in